| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: [PATCHES] archiver ps display] |
| Date: | 2007-12-13 14:28:31 |
| Message-ID: | 1197556111.4255.1787.camel@ebony.site |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 11:16 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 10:55 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > > I agree that replication should be able to be monitored. However,
> > > isn't ps_display supposed to show what the process is _currently_ doing?
> > > So if the archiver finishes processing a file, its display should go
> > > back to "idle" or some such. (Perhaps "idle, last archived XXXYYYZZZ")
> >
> > That was my first thought, but that ends up with the archiver ps display
> > being mostly blank, and so isn't really very useful.
>
> What about the second suggestion?
Sorry. My preference is terse, but that looks fine to me.
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-12-13 14:58:25 | Re: [Fwd: [PATCHES] archiver ps display] |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-12-13 14:24:56 | Re: [HACKERS] Slow PITR restore |