<br /><br /> On 09/24/2010 11:11 AM, Tom Lane wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:25617.1285341066@sss.pgh.pa.us"
type="cite"><prewrap="">Andrew Dunstan <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:andrew@dunslane.net"><andrew@dunslane.net></a>writes:
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">On 09/24/2010 10:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">In that case, we should probably teach pg_ctl about this case, no?
Since it clearly gives an incorrect message to the user now...
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><pre wrap="">
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">pg_ctl decides that the server is running iff it can connect to it. Do
you intend to provide for a different test?
</pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">
Seems like getting a password challenge from the server is sufficient
evidence that the server is running, whether we are able to meet the
challenge or not. Perhaps we could just twiddle pg_ctl's "is it up"
test a bit to notice whether the connect failure was of this sort.
</pre></blockquote><br /> pg_ctl does in fact use that sort of logic:<br /><br /><blockquote>if ((conn =
PQconnectdb(connstr))!= NULL &&<br /> (PQstatus(conn) == CONNECTION_OK ||<br />
PQconnectionNeedsPassword(conn)))<br/></blockquote><br /> But of course, libpq won't set that last condition if there
isa bad password in the pgpass file, which seems a rather perverse thing to do.<br /><br /> cheers<br /><br />
andrew<br/>