From: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz |
Cc: | boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com, bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pg(at)bowt(dot)ie |
Subject: | Re: Add pg_walinspect function with block info columns |
Date: | 2023-03-07 09:07:58 |
Message-ID: | 20230307.180758.1908396491658999082.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At Tue, 7 Mar 2023 16:18:21 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote in
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 03:49:02PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > Ah. Yes, that expansion sounds sensible.
>
> Okay, so, based on this idea, I have hacked on this stuff and finish
> with the attached that shows block data if it exists, as well as FPI
> stuff if any. bimg_info is showed as a text[] for its flags.
# The naming convetion looks inconsistent between
# pg_get_wal_records_info and pg_get_wal_block_info but it's not an
# issue of this patch..
> I guess that I'd better add a test that shows correctly a record with
> some block data attached to it, on top of the existing one for FPIs..
> Any suggestions? Perhaps just a heap/heap2 record?
>
> Thoughts?
I thought that we needed a test for block data when I saw the patch.
I don't have great idea but a single insert should work.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2023-03-07 09:08:55 | Re: using memoize in in paralel query decreases performance |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-03-07 09:00:54 | Re: [PATCH] Use indexes on the subscriber when REPLICA IDENTITY is full on the publisher |