On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 7:21 PM Jim Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > > I personally lean towards that maybe we should keep it simple and go > > back to the origins of the patch which just tried to show if it is a > > standby or not given how complex it is to tell that we are in read-only > > or not. The alternative would be to update the protocol so the client if > > informed if a transaction is read-only or not but I do not think it > > would be possible to convince people to update the protocol just for > > psql. Maybe if some connection pooler would also be interest but I am > > not sure what they would need this for. > > > If we decide to not consider transaction_read_only for this feature, I > guess we should prevent the prompt to show anything if inside of a > transaction block. Simply ignoring it and showing a potentially wrong > status wouldn't be a good idea. > > What do you guys think?
If the main goal of this feature is to help users easily determine whether they're connected to a primary or a standby, seems simply showing whether the server is in hot standby should be sufficient. I'm not sure how useful it would be in practice to show information based on default_transaction_read_only or transaction_read_only. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
