Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I was envisioning just using PostmasterRandom() (after initializing
> the seed from time(NULL) as we do now). I don't think we need a
> super-wide random number.
Fine with me. Just that and CanAcceptConnections in the response?
It seems like pg_ping (client utility and related postmaster support)
should be a discrete patch. Improvements to pg_ctl and init scripts
would come later, as separate patches?
-Kevin