| From: | Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ps display "waiting for max_standby_delay" |
| Date: | 2010-06-11 02:20:00 |
| Message-ID: | 20100611112000.CEBA.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > how about showing actual waiting time instead?
> > " waiting for max_standby_delay (%d ms)",
> > MaxStandbyDelay)
>
> Sounds interesting, but how often would the ps statust display be
> updated? I hope not too often.
We can change the interval of updates to 500ms or so if do it,
but I rethink ps display is not the best place for the information.
I'd like to modify the additonal message "waiting for max_standby_delay"
just to "waiting", because we don't use "waiting for statement_timeout"
for normal queries.
If we need additional information about conflictions in recovery,
we would supply them with SQL views instead of ps display in 9.1.
Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-06-11 02:26:30 | Re: failover vs. read only queries |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-06-11 00:46:33 | Re: Bug / shortcoming in has_*_privilege |