On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 22:21, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: >> >>> To my way of thinking, pg_stat_walsender and pg_stat_walreceiver would >>> be more clear than pg_stat_replication_master and >>> pg_stat_replication_slave. >> >> Let's commit it so that some of us can get a look at the data it >> contains, and then we can fix the name during beta. > > Well, the first half is committed, under the name pg_stat_replication. > So go look at that, for starters...
One thing I noticed is that it gives an interesting property to my patch for streaming base backups - they now show up in pg_stat_replication, with a streaming location of 0/0. If the view is named pg_stat_replication, we probably want to filter that out somehow. But then, do we want a separate view listing the walsenders that are busy sending base backups? For that matter, do we want an indication that separates a walsender not sending data from one sending that happens to be at location 0/0? Most will leave 0/0 really quickly, but a walsender can be idle (not received a command yet), or it can be running IDENTIFY_SYSTEM for example. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
