public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
To: Stephen Frost <[email protected]>
Cc: Yurii Rashkovskii <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Greg Stark <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow Postgres to pick an unused port to listen
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2023 16:16:03 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CA+TgmobxUVJ9O6i_tYX9bFL4dO1UAKSgTnj1tGz0+c5MTRDLXA@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+RLCQwmNGvENLWaHwh3gDMnDUWyopV35+V3dXsNUA9A6_ZxKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmobBZs7mAVUoUAUc6yFOQTRefN8DnT_QMvqtm1QAv8Gfpg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAM-w4HNO6d9Egr1JX+wGRFSJDOFVN6wMFxajfqdpgdx=eH20zQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+Tgmob5BHPRhCZuZupKeacxMnvxHnuHAPXcA8XNj2KiPFDsKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+RLCQzF2r1ShfXQRyTL6azhpuPMxDRWzJdHK75r5csrm_crHA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+RLCQw=a-=CQ6Pg-zuNwfNR=_Aa9R--F6jAR7bJZ5TCGYfOhw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
On 19.04.23 06:21, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I don't think involving pg_ctl is necessary or desirable, since it would
>> make any future changes like that even more complicated.
> I'm a bit confused by this- if pg_ctl is invoked then we have
> more-or-less full control over parsing and reporting out the answer, so
> while it might be a bit more complicated for us, it seems surely simpler
> for the end user. Or maybe you're referring to something here that I'm
> not thinking of?
Getting pg_ctl involved just requires a lot more work. We need to write
actual code, documentation, tests, help output, translations, etc. If
we ever change anything, then we need to transition the command-line
arguments somehow, add more documentation, etc.
A file is a much simpler interface: You just write to it, write two
sentences of documentation, that's all.
Or to put it another way, if we don't think a file is an appropriate
interface, then why is a PID file appropriate?
> Independent of the above though ... this hand-wringing about what we
> might do in the relative near-term when we haven't done much in the past
> many-many years regarding listen_addresses or port strikes me as
> unlikely to be necessary. Let's pick something and get it done and
> accept that we may have to change it at some point in the future, but
> that's kinda what major releases are for, imv anyway.
Right. I'm perfectly content with just allowing port number 0 and
leaving it at that.
view thread (22+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow Postgres to pick an unused port to listen
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox