| From: | Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_replication docs incomplete for logical replication |
| Date: | 2026-06-16 10:52:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAE9k0Pm=DhO5+EpR+Xot=Un5gcRd2mPTBpKjgqVcFmOmopmRyw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Peter,
Thanks for reviewing the patch and sharing your feedback. Please find
my responses inline below:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 10:46 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ashutosh.
>
> +1 to clarify documentation.
>
> Some minor review comments.
>
> ======
>
> doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml
>
> (27.2.4. pg_stat_replication)
>
> 1.
> + <para>
> + For physical replication, the LSN columns in this view describe the
> + positions up to which WAL has been sent, written, flushed, and replayed
> + on the connected standby server. For logical replication,
> + <structfield>sent_lsn</structfield> reflects the LSN up to which the
> + walsender has processed WAL records. Such records may already have been
> + streamed to the subscriber, queued for streaming at transaction commit, or
> + skipped because they were not eligible for logical decoding.
> +
> + <structfield>write_lsn</structfield>, <structfield>flush_lsn</structfield>,
> + and <structfield>replay_lsn</structfield> reflect progress reported by the
> + subscriber through replication status messages, and do not necessarily
> + mean that logical changes up to those LSNs have already been
> + received, durably stored, or made visible on the subscriber.
> </para>
>
> 1a.
> I'm not sure of the purpose of that blank line; it doesn't affect the
> rendering in HTML.
>
Agreed - this had no impact on the final output and was only added for
readability purposes. I have removed it accordingly.
> ~
>
> 1b.
> Consider splitting the text differently so there is 1 paragraph for
> "Physical Replication" and 1 paragraph for "Logical Replication". So,
> the same content just with different <para> markup.
>
> SUGGESTION
> <para>
> For physical replication, ...
> </para>
> <para>
> For logical replication, ...
> </para>
>
Updated as suggested.
> ~~~
>
> 2.
> <structfield>write_lsn</structfield> <type>pg_lsn</type>
> </para>
> <para>
> - Last write-ahead log location written to disk by this standby
> - server
> + For physical replication, the last write-ahead log location written
> + to disk by this standby server. For logical replication, progress
> + reported by the subscriber through replication status messages.
> </para></entry>
> </row
>
> For that 2nd sentence, do you mean /progress reported/progress is reported/
>
> Or, here is some alternate wording:
> For logical replication, progress is reported by replication status
> messages received from the subscriber.
>
Updated as suggested. The same change has also been applied to
flush_lsn and replay_lsn where similar feedback applied.
Please find the updated patch attached and let me know for any further
comments, thanks.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-doc-clarify-pg_stat_replication-view-for-logical-rep.patch | application/octet-stream | 6.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2026-06-16 11:08:03 | Re: Support EXCEPT for TABLES IN SCHEMA publications |
| Previous Message | Ewan Young | 2026-06-16 10:51:48 | Re: 004_timeline_switch TAP test may fail |