On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 08:04:44AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 12:35:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Also for sync? sync looks fine as issue_xlog_fsync() is being called in > XLogWalRcvFlush(), no?
Yes, we're OK for the sync data aggregated in the WAL receiver on HEAD, as mentioned below, not in the back-branches. > We're not emitting some statistics, so I think that it's hard for users to > complain about something they don't/can't see. One would see idle data in pg_stat_wal on a standby, so the lack of data could be annoying, but I'm perhaps the only one who noticed that.. > Same logic as in XLogWrite() and I don't think there is a need for a > dedicated wait event, so LGTM. Thanks. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
