| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: system views for walsender activity |
| Date: | 2011-01-04 19:56:55 |
| Message-ID: | 4D237B87.1030100@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04.01.2011 21:43, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Magnus Hagander<magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 20:28, Josh Berkus<josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> hmmm I think "pg_stat_standby" might be more relevant but I definitely
>>>> agree something more newbie appropriate is in order.
>>>
>>> I'd be fine with that name, too.
>>
>> That seems kind of backwards though - given that the view only
>> contains data on the master...
>
> I think pg_stat_replication is better than pg_stat_standby, but I'm
> still not convinced we shouldn't go with the obvious
> pg_stat_walsenders.
How about pg_stat_replication_activity? If I understood correctly, the
view is similar to pg_stat_activity, but displays information about
connected standbys rather than regular backends. It's a bit long name,
though.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2011-01-04 20:02:14 | Re: system views for walsender activity |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-01-04 19:54:04 | Re: Sync Rep Design |