On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 15:12:30 +0900
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 05:54:08PM +0100, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> > Please find the new version of the patch in attachment.
>
> To be honest, I find the concept of this patch confusing.
> pg_stat_wal_receiver is just a
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 05:54:08PM +0100, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> Please find the new version of the patch in attachment.
To be honest, I find the concept of this patch confusing.
pg_stat_wal_receiver is just a one-one mapping with the shared memory
state of the WAL receiver itself
On Tue, 07 Jan 2020 15:57:29 +0900 (JST)
Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Mon, 23 Dec 2019 15:38:16 +0100, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> wrote in
> > 1. we could decide to remove this filter to expose the data even when no
> > wal receiver is active. It's the same behavior than
At Fri, 3 Jan 2020 16:11:38 +0100, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
wrote in
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2019 15:38:16 +0100
> Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> [...]
> > My idea would be to return a row from pg_stat_get_wal_receiver() as soon as
> > a wal receiver has been replicating during the
Hi,
On Mon, 23 Dec 2019 15:38:16 +0100
Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
[...]
> My idea would be to return a row from pg_stat_get_wal_receiver() as soon as
> a wal receiver has been replicating during the uptime of the standby, no
> matter if there's one currently working or not. If no wal
On Mon, 23 Dec 2019 12:36:56 +0900
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 11:14:28AM +0100, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> > Yes, that would be great but sadly, it would introduce a regression on
> > various tools relying on them. At least, the one doing "select *" or most
> >
On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 11:14:28AM +0100, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> Yes, that would be great but sadly, it would introduce a regression on various
> tools relying on them. At least, the one doing "select *" or most
> probably "select func()".
>
> But anyway, adding 5 funcs is not a big
On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 13:41:25 +0900 (JST)
Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Fri, 20 Dec 2019 00:35:19 +0100, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> wrote in
> > On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 16:12:55 +0900
> > Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> The first one;
>
> > > I mentioned a SRF function which takes an input
At Fri, 20 Dec 2019 00:35:19 +0100, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
wrote in
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 16:12:55 +0900
> Michael Paquier wrote:
The first one;
> > I mentioned a SRF function which takes an input argument, but that
> > makes no sense. What I would prefer having is just having one
> >
On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 16:12:55 +0900
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 10:45:25AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I'm confused- wouldn't the above approach be a function that's returning
> > only one row, if you had a bunch of columns and then had NULL values for
> > those cases
On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 14:20:02 +0900
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 07:20:46PM +0200, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> > If this solution is accepted, some other function of the same family might
> > be good candidates as well, for the sake of homogeneity:
> >
> > *
On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 10:45:25AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I'm confused- wouldn't the above approach be a function that's returning
> only one row, if you had a bunch of columns and then had NULL values for
> those cases that didn't apply..? Or, if you were thinking about the SRF
> approach
Greetings,
* Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 10:16:29AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I've not followed this discussion very closely but I agree entirely that
> > it's really nice to have the timeline be able to be queried in a more
> > timely manner than
On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 10:16:29AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I've not followed this discussion very closely but I agree entirely that
> it's really nice to have the timeline be able to be queried in a more
> timely manner than asking through pg_control_checkpoint() gives you.
>
> I'm not sure
Greetings,
* Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote:
> I would be actually tempted to do the following: one single SRF
> function, say pg_wal_info which takes a text argument in input with
> the following values: flush, write, insert, receive, replay. Thinking
> more about it that would be
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 07:20:46PM +0200, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> If this solution is accepted, some other function of the same family might be
> good candidates as well, for the sake of homogeneity:
>
> * pg_current_wal_insert_lsn
> * pg_current_wal_flush_lsn
> *
On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 19:44:10 +0900
Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 12:06 AM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 00:32:03 +0900
> > Fujii Masao wrote:
> >
[...]
> Thanks for updating the patch!
Thank you for your review!
Please find in attachment a new
On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 12:06 AM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 00:32:03 +0900
> Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 7:26 PM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 18:22:25 +0200
> > > Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> >
On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 00:32:03 +0900
Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 7:26 PM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 18:22:25 +0200
> > Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:02:58 +0200
> > > Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 7:26 PM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 18:22:25 +0200
> Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:02:58 +0200
> > Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 16:49:53 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time)
> > >
On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 18:22:25 +0200
Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:02:58 +0200
> Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 16:49:53 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time)
> > Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> [...]
> > > We have an LSN reporting function each for
On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:02:58 +0200
Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 16:49:53 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time)
> Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
[...]
> > We have an LSN reporting function each for several objectives.
> >
> > pg_current_wal_lsn
> > pg_current_wal_insert_lsn
> >
On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 16:49:53 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time)
Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Hi.
>
> At Thu, 25 Jul 2019 19:38:08 +0200, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> wrote in <20190725193808.1648ddc8@firost>
> > On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:33:27 +0200
> > Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> >
> > > On
Hi.
At Thu, 25 Jul 2019 19:38:08 +0200, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
wrote in <20190725193808.1648ddc8@firost>
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:33:27 +0200
> Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 09:49:05 +0900
> > Michael Paquier wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at
Hello,
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:33:27 +0200
Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 09:49:05 +0900
> Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 06:05:18PM +0200, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> > wrote:
[...]
> > I think that there are arguments for being more
Hello Michael,
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 09:49:05 +0900
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 06:05:18PM +0200, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> > Please, find in attachment a first trivial patch to support
> > pg_walfile_name() and pg_walfile_name_offset() on a standby.
> > Previous
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 06:05:18PM +0200, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> Please, find in attachment a first trivial patch to support pg_walfile_name()
> and pg_walfile_name_offset() on a standby.
> Previous restriction on this functions seems related to ThisTimeLineID not
> being safe on
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 16:00:29 -0400
David Steele wrote:
> On 7/23/19 2:59 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> >
> >> 23 июля 2019 г., в 21:05, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> >> написал(а):
> >>
> >> Fetching the timeline from a standby could be useful in various situation.
> >> Either for backup tools
On 7/23/19 2:59 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>
>> 23 июля 2019 г., в 21:05, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
>> написал(а):
>>
>> Fetching the timeline from a standby could be useful in various situation.
>> Either for backup tools [1] or failover tools during some kind of election
>> process.
> That
> 23 июля 2019 г., в 21:05, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> написал(а):
>
> Fetching the timeline from a standby could be useful in various situation.
> Either for backup tools [1] or failover tools during some kind of election
> process.
That backup tool is reading timeline from
30 matches
Mail list logo
