Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> I now notice that "pg_ctl -w start" fails if the postgres db is missing.
> I am not sure that changing pg_ctl to use this rather than template1 was
> a good thing, and it can't be overridden. I suggest we revert that
> particular change - it seems to me to confer little to no benefit,
> unlike the case with createdb etc.
pg_ctl -w is already incredibly fragile because it needs a working
password-free login name. Rather than worrying about whether the
database name exists, what we ought to do is invent the long-awaited
"ping" extension to the postmaster protocol --- something that would
just ask "are you up and ready to accept connections" without having
to specify a valid user *or* database name.
You can sort of do this today if you are willing to examine the error
message that comes back from the postmaster, but I think it'd be cleaner
to have an official protocol extension.
regards, tom lane
