On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 17:08 -0400, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 17/05/10 12:36, Jim Nasby wrote: > > On May 15, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >> What exactly is the user trying to monitor? If it's "how far behind is > >> the standby", the difference between pg_current_xlog_insert_location() > >> in the master and pg_last_xlog_replay_location() in the standby seems > >> more robust and well-defined to me. It's a measure of XLOG location (ie. > >> bytes) instead of time, but time is a complicated concept. > > > > I can tell you that end users *will* want a time-based indication of how > > far behind we are. DBAs will understand "we're this many transactions > > behind", but managers and end users won't. Unless it's unreasonable to > > provide that info, we should do so. > > No doubt about that, the problem is that it's hard to provide a reliable > time-based indication.
I think I have one now. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
