Re: pg_system_identifier()

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_system_identifier()
Date: 2013-08-26 21:25:49
Message-ID: 521BC7DD.8090001@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 08/26/2013 01:50 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> All the other variables are either already exposed, don't seem to be all
> that interesting or not necessary accurate for a running cluster.
>
> I'd vote for doing things piecemal here, otherwise it seems to be too
> likely that we never get anywhere.

Ok, that sounds like a vote to accept the pg_system_identifier patch, then.

Given that the one thing I'd like to do is add to the docs on that
patch, cautioning users that system_identifier doesn't mean what they
think it means.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Gierth 2013-08-26 23:24:58 Re: UNNEST with multiple args, and TABLE with multiple funcs
Previous Message Andres Freund 2013-08-26 20:50:09 Re: pg_system_identifier()