On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> >> wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 13:50, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> >>>> wrote: >>>>> The pg_stat_replication view exposes all the fields in >>>>> StandbyReplyMessage *except* for the timestamp when the message was >>>>> generated. On an active system this is not all that interesting, but >>>>> on a mostly idle system that allows the monitoring to react faster >>>>> than the timeout that actually kicks the other end off - and could be >>>>> useful in manual debugging scenarios. Any particular reason why this >>>>> was not exposed as it's own column? >>>> >>>> I wondered the same thing. Sounds like a good idea. >>> >>> I can go do that. Care to argue^Wbikeshed for a specific name? >> >> reply_timestamp > > Works for me.
> I'd suggest that we rename it that way in > StandbyReplyMessage, so that the name in the struct and the name in > the system view match. -1 The field is named same as equivalent field in other messages. The field on the view is a summary of all previous messages, which is a different thing. Perhaps we should call it last_reply_timestamp to make that clearer, though long titles are annoying. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
