Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 19:50, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> Does this actually solve the *problem*, though? The problem is not
> >> what is reported ?on stdout/stderr, the problem is that the net result
> >> is that the server is reported as not started (by the service control
> >> manager) when it actually *is* started. In this case, stderr doesn't
> >> even go anywhere. What happens if you *don't* Ctrl-C it?
> >
> > I was just going to post on that. ?:-) ?Right now, it prints the FATAL
> > and keeps printing 60 times, then says not running. ?Should we just exit
> > on FATAL and output a special exit string, or say running?
>
> >From the perspective of the service control manager, it should say
> running. That might break other scenarios though, but i'm not sure - I
> think we can safely say the server is running when we try to log in
> and get a password failure.
That was another part of the discussion. Right now we report any FATAL,
so it might be a password problem, or something else, and it seems doing
all FATALs is the best idea because it will catch any other cases like
this.
Is FATAL, in general, enough to conclude the server is running?
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +