Re: Change pg_last_xlog_receive_location not to move backwards

On 26.02.2011 16:58, Robert Haas wrote:
> It sounds like the only thing we have definite agreement about from
> all this is that apply_location should be renamed to replay_location
> in pg_stat_replication, a point fairly incidental to the what this
> patch is about. It seems fairly unsatisfying to just change that and
> punt the rest of this, but I'm not sure what the alternative is.

After reading the discussions, I don't see any actual opposition to
Fujii-san's patch. And I think it makes sense, the new definition makes
sense for the purpose Fujii mentioned in the mail that started this
thread: determining which standby is most up-to-date.

There has been a lot of good suggestions, like verifying the received
WAL before overwriting existing WAL. But we're not going to start doing
bigger code changes this late in the release cycle. And even if we did,
this patch would still make sense - we still wouldn't want
pg_last_xlog_receive_location() to move backwards.

So, committed.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com