| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Enhance pg_stat_wal_receiver view to display connected host |
| Date: | 2018-01-12 04:26:00 |
| Message-ID: | 20180112042600.GG2222@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:37:22AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I have redone my set of previous tests and can confirm that PQhost is
> behaving as I would expect it should, and those results are the same as
> yours.
if (conn->connhost != NULL &&
- conn->connhost[conn->whichhost].type != CHT_HOST_ADDRESS)
+ conn->connhost[conn->whichhost].host != NULL &&
+ conn->connhost[conn->whichhost].host[0] != '\0')
return conn->connhost[conn->whichhost].host;
- else if (conn->pghost != NULL && conn->pghost[0] != '\0')
- return conn->pghost;
Upon further review, the second bit of the patch is making me itching. I
think that you should not remove the second check which returns
conn->pghost if a value is found in it.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-01-12 04:49:31 | Re: Parameters in user-defined aggregate final functions |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2018-01-12 04:12:21 | Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning |