On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 21:48, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: >> * pg_stat_replication >> * pg_stat_standby (not yet) > > Just to keep the bikeshedding up, should it in this case not be > pg_stat_replication_master and pg_stat_replication_standby or such? > Replication applies to both master and slave...
The reason I didn't use term "master" is that pg_stat_replication is information of *standby* servers on master server. Of course, wal senders are processes in the master, but users probably think they are the location standby servers receives. I forgot to update SGML for the view. I'll do it soon. Thanks for the heads-up. -- Itagaki Takahiro -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
