| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_replication.*_lag sometimes shows NULL during active replication |
| Date: | 2026-03-17 02:00:38 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwFzg9J_z71kwnjXOxaoO3upMW8RdT4ieE8MBLq6h-ojZg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 9:26 AM Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thank you for the v4 patch. I think this approach is better than mine.
> I tested the patch and confirmed that the issue no longer reproduces
> with physical replication. However, with logical replication, the lag
> columns in pg_stat_replication still show NULL periodically at
> wal_receiver_status_interval, since send_feedback() in worker.c can
> still send duplicate positions.
I was thinking that if a feedback message triggered by
wal_receiver_status_interval has the same LSNs as the previous message,
it's expected for the lag columns to become NULL. But you see it differently,
don't you? Sorry, I failed to understand your point...
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Corey Huinker | 2026-03-17 02:05:51 | Re: Add starelid, attnum to pg_stats and leverage this in pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Chao Li | 2026-03-17 01:57:08 | Re: Improve OAuth discovery logging |