Re: pg_control_recovery() return value when not in recovery

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pg_control_recovery() return value when not in recovery
Date: 2017-09-18 06:24:43
Message-ID: CANP8+j+TnCBh7g+=dz+q0suXchReGgWA_Nc2ZWbayxxXucNAzA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 18 September 2017 at 05:50, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just noticed that we're returning the underlying values for
> pg_control_recovery() without any checks:
> postgres[14388][1]=# SELECT * FROM pg_control_recovery();
> ┌──────────────────────┬───────────────────────────┬──────────────────┬────────────────┬───────────────────────────────┐
> │ min_recovery_end_lsn │ min_recovery_end_timeline │ backup_start_lsn │ backup_end_lsn │ end_of_backup_record_required │
> ├──────────────────────┼───────────────────────────┼──────────────────┼────────────────┼───────────────────────────────┤
> │ 0/0 │ 0 │ 0/0 │ 0/0 │ f │
> └──────────────────────┴───────────────────────────┴──────────────────┴────────────────┴───────────────────────────────┘
> (1 row)

Yes, that would have made sense for these to be NULL

> postgres[14388][1]=# SELECT pg_is_in_recovery();
> ┌───────────────────┐
> │ pg_is_in_recovery │
> ├───────────────────┤
> │ f │
> └───────────────────┘
> (1 row)

But not this, since it is a boolean and the answer is known.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2017-09-18 06:29:32 Re: pg_control_recovery() return value when not in recovery
Previous Message MauMau 2017-09-18 06:07:00 Re: sync process names between ps and pg_stat_activity