Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> On 1/14/13 10:22 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Also it appears to me that the hunk at lines 812ff is changing the
>> default behavior, which is not what the patch is advertised to do.
> True, I had forgotten to mention that.
> Since it's already the behavior for start, another option would be to
> just make it the default for stop as well and forget about the extra
> options. I'm not sure whether there is a big use case for getting an
> error code on stop if the server is already stopped.
Actually, I seem to recall having had to hack Red Hat's initscript
because the LSB standard requires that stopping a not-running server
*not* be an error. So +1 for forgetting about the option entirely
and just making it idempotent all the time.
regards, tom lane