From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: system views for walsender activity |
Date: | 2011-01-05 13:35:32 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikuT5zJH_W_oPRmZFbEkhWtavDiMBakRh8Mf0dj@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 02:32, Itagaki Takahiro
<itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 04:56, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I think pg_stat_replication is better than pg_stat_standby, but I'm
>>> still not convinced we shouldn't go with the obvious
>>> pg_stat_walsenders.
>>
>> How about pg_stat_replication_activity? If I understood correctly, the view
>> is similar to pg_stat_activity, but displays information about connected
>> standbys rather than regular backends. It's a bit long name, though.
>
> The view currently discussed is for *master* servers. We might have some
> views for replication activity in *standby* servers. So, I'd like to
> choose consistent and symmetric names for them -- for example,
> pg_stat_replication_master and pg_stat_replication_standby.
> I've expected they will be pg_stat_wal_[senders|receivers]
> when I was writing the patch, but any other better names welcome.
>
> However, we have "max_wal_senders" GUC parameter. So, users still
> need to know what "wal_senders" is.
An example to compare with could be pg_stat_bgwriter - that's also one
the really expects you to know some internals. Now, it so happens that
it's a very *bad* example, since it contains a bunch of information
that's *not* actually about the bgwriter these days :-)
But from that perspective, is it likely to ever contain anyting
*other* than walsender information? Given that it's keyed by the
process id of a walsender, I don't expect it would. Whereas a
pg_stat_replication or such could equally be expected to contain
information about other ways of replication - like the file based
modes or even slony.
+1 for pg_stat_walsender or pg_stat_walsender_activity
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Florian Pflug | 2011-01-05 13:41:35 | Re: Support for negative index values in array fetching |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2011-01-05 13:24:45 | Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions |