| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com" <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com" <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Making WAL receiver startup rely on GUC context for primary_conninfo and primary_slot_name |
| Date: | 2018-12-13 00:06:26 |
| Message-ID: | 20181213000626.GC9437@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 06:55:04PM +0300, Sergei Kornilov wrote:
>> This allows the state of walrcv and startup to diverge, they could
>> e.g. have different configuration, due to differently time config
>> reloads.
>
> So we have exactly same problem with, for example, hot_standby_feedback, right?
> We change hot_standby_feedback value, reload it and we can have 'show
> hot_standby_feedback' different to currently running walreceiver. But
> why we have nothing about hot_standby_feedback in pg_stat_get_wal_receiver()?
> Where is difference?
The difference is in the fact that a WAL receiver uses the connection
string and the slot name when establishing the connection when using
START_STREAMING through the replication protocol, and
hot_standby_feedback gets used depending on the context of the messages
exchanged.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-12-13 00:17:12 | Re: Add timeline to partial WAL segments |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-12-13 00:01:23 | Re: Remove Deprecated Exclusive Backup Mode |