I wrote:
> On further contemplation, it seems like the protocol needs another field
> besides that: each record should also carry a boolean indicating whether
> walsender.c thinks it is currently "caught up", ie the record carries
> all WAL data up to the current end of WAL.
Actually, there's a better way to do that: let's have the record carry
not just a boolean but the actual current end-of-WAL LSN. The receiver
could then not just determine "am I behind" but find out *how far*
behind it is, and thereby perhaps adjust its behavior in more subtle
ways than just a binary on/off fashion.
(Actually doing anything like that is material for future work, of
course, but I think we should try to get the SR protocol right now.)
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
