From: | Maksim Milyutin <milyutinma(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Typo in description of replay_lag attribute in pg_stat_replication view |
Date: | 2018-12-04 22:24:22 |
Message-ID: | 0cfde408-a360-3461-124c-cfa0c72e3b0d@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
04.12.2018 5:19, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 01:28:15PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 1:18 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>>> Yes, you are right. It should be "on" as "remote_flush" is not a valid
>>> value. remote_flush is listed in SyncCommitLevel though, so this makes
>>> me wonder if we should also introduce a new value for this purpose
>>> available for users. The fix you propose looks good to me. Any
>>> opinions from others?
>> +1 for the patch.
> Thanks for confirming, Thomas. I'll go apply hopefully tomorrow if
> nobody has objections.
>
>> As for introducing remote_flush as the true name of the level, this
>> was discussed but somehow went off-course and never made it to the
>> finish line:
>>
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAEepm%3D3FFaanSS4sugG%2BApzq2tCVjEYCO2wOQBod2d7GWb%3DDvA%40mail.gmail.com
> Oh, I forgot this one. We may want to revive that... remote_flush is
> more meaningful than on, especially since there are more and more
> possible values for synchronous_commit.
Yeah, I think the notion *remote_flush level* is more appropriate
especially in the context of sync replication. Within this context maybe
it makes sense to replace the word *level* to *value* in description of
*flush_lag*?
--
Regards,
Maksim Milyutin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-12-05 01:04:55 | Re: Typo in description of replay_lag attribute in pg_stat_replication view |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-12-04 02:19:25 | Re: Typo in description of replay_lag attribute in pg_stat_replication view |