Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > The reason this is a problem is that somebody, in a fit of inappropriate
> > optimization, took out the code that allowed canAcceptConnections to
> > distinguish the "not consistent yet" state.
>
> Oh, no, that's not the case --- the PM_RECOVERY postmaster state does
> still distinguish not-ready from ready. The real problem is that what
> Bruce implemented has practically nothing to do with what was discussed
> last week. PQping is supposed to be smarter about classifying errors
> than this.
I was not aware this was discussed last week because I am behind on
email. I was fixing a report from a month ago. I did explain how I was
doing the tests.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +