Le 22/06/2010 06:40, Takahiro Itagaki a écrit : > [...] > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> I'm of the opinion that this is a 9.1 problem. It needs more thought >> than we can put into it now --- one obvious question is what about >> monitoring on the slave side? Another is who should be able to see the >> data? > > Sure. We should research user's demands for monitoring and management > of replication. I'll report some voices from users as of this moment: > > * Managers often ask DBAs "How long standby servers are behind the master?" > We should provide such methods for DBAs. We have pg_xlog_location() > functions, but they should be improved for: > - The returned values are "xxx/yyy" texts, but more useful information > is the difference of two values. Subtraction functions are required. > - For easier management, the master server should provide not only > sent/flush locations but also received/replayed locations for each > standby servers. Users don't want to access both master and slaves. > > * Some developers want to pause and restart replication from the master > server. They're going to use replication for application version > managements. They'll pause all replications, and test their new features > at the master, and restart replication to spread the changes to slaves. >
I agree on these two. Something I found lacking when I added support for Hot Standby / Streaming Replication in pgAdmin (that was a really small patch, there was not a lot to do) was that one cannot get the actual value of each recovery.conf parameter. Try a "SHOW primary_conninfo;" and it will juste reply that primary_conninfo is an unknown parameter. I already talked about this to Heikki, but didn't get a chance to actually look at the code. -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers