On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:23 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>>> The function, maybe. But emitting an all-nulls row from a view seems
>>> counter-intuitive, at least when looking at it in context of relational
>>> database.
>> OK, noted. Any other opinions?
> I wouldn't bother with the view.  If we're going to do it, I'd say
> just provide the function and let people SELECT * from it if they want
> to.

OK, I took some time to write a patch for that as attached, added in
the next CF here:
I am fine switching to an SRF depending on other opinions of people
here, it just seems like an overkill knowing the uniqueness of the WAL
sender in a server.

I have finished with a function and a system view, this came up more
in line with the existing things like pg_stat_archiver, and this makes
as well the documentation clearer, at least that was my feeling when
hacking that.

Attachment: 0001-Add-system-view-and-function-to-report-WAL-receiver-.patch
Description: binary/octet-stream

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to