On 09/17/2017 11:29 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-09-18 07:24:43 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: >> On 18 September 2017 at 05:50, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > Just noticed that we're returning the underlying values for >> > pg_control_recovery() without any checks: >> > postgres[14388][1]=# SELECT * FROM pg_control_recovery(); >> > ┌──────────────────────┬───────────────────────────┬──────────────────┬────────────────┬───────────────────────────────┐ >> > │ min_recovery_end_lsn │ min_recovery_end_timeline │ backup_start_lsn │ >> > backup_end_lsn │ end_of_backup_record_required │ >> > ├──────────────────────┼───────────────────────────┼──────────────────┼────────────────┼───────────────────────────────┤ >> > │ 0/0 │ 0 │ 0/0 │ >> > 0/0 │ f │ >> > └──────────────────────┴───────────────────────────┴──────────────────┴────────────────┴───────────────────────────────┘ >> > (1 row) >> >> Yes, that would have made sense for these to be NULL > > Yea, that's what I think was well. Joe, IIRC that's your code, do you > agree as well?
Sorry for the slow response, but thinking back on this now, the idea of these functions, in my mind at least, was to provide as close to the same output as possible to what pg_controldata outputs. So: # pg_controldata ... Minimum recovery ending location: 0/0 Min recovery ending loc's timeline: 0 Backup start location: 0/0 Backup end location: 0/0 End-of-backup record required: no ... So if we make a change here, do we also change pg_controldata? Joe -- Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature