[PATCH] Modify pg_ctl to detect presence of geek user

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 04:17:21PM +0300, Panda Developpeur wrote:

Dear PostgreSQL Hackers,

I am submitting a patch to modify pg_ctl to detect the presence of a geek user
on the system and adapt its behavior accordingly. This patch introduces the
following changes:

1. Detection of geek user: The modified pg_ctl now checks user created on the
computer.

2. No documentation or tests: Please note that I have not included new
documentation or tests in this patch submission. However, I am open to
adding them based on the community's feedback.

3. Performance impact: The performance impact of these changes is minimal,
with an expected delay of 500ms in specific scenarios only.

Please review the patch and provide your feedback. I am open to making any
necessary improvements based on the community's suggestions.

Thank you for considering my contribution.

Aside from an extra newline in the patch, I think this is ready to go!

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Only you can decide what is important to you.

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 09:25:02AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 04:17:21PM +0300, Panda Developpeur wrote:

Dear PostgreSQL Hackers,

I am submitting a patch to modify pg_ctl to detect the presence of a geek user
on the system and adapt its behavior accordingly. This patch introduces the
following changes:

1. Detection of geek user: The modified pg_ctl now checks user created on the
computer.

2. No documentation or tests: Please note that I have not included new
documentation or tests in this patch submission. However, I am open to
adding them based on the community's feedback.

3. Performance impact: The performance impact of these changes is minimal,
with an expected delay of 500ms in specific scenarios only.

Please review the patch and provide your feedback. I am open to making any
necessary improvements based on the community's suggestions.

Thank you for considering my contribution.

Aside from an extra newline in the patch, I think this is ready to go!

Also, it feels like the deadline for this patch was two days ago. ;-)

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Only you can decide what is important to you.

Yeah sorry for the delay, it took me some time to understood how build,
modify and test the modification

On 3 Apr 2024, at 18:17, Panda Developpeur <panda.developpeur@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you for considering my contribution.

Looks interesting!

+ usleep(500000);

Don't we need to make system 500ms faster instead? Let's change it to

+ usleep(-500000);

Thanks!

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.