| From: | Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |
| Date: | 2016-02-17 22:20:25 |
| Message-ID: | 56C4F229.4060200@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/17/2016 01:31 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 1/31/16 7:34 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I am marking this patch as returned with feedback for now, not all the
>> issues have been fixed yet, and there are still no docs (the
>> conclusion being that people would like to have this stuff, right?).
>> Feel free to move it to the next CF should a new version be written.
>
> I think we still don't have a real use case for this feature, and a
> couple of points against it.
I have a use-case for this feature, at part of it containerized
PostgreSQL. Right now, there is certain diagnostic information (like
timeline) which is exposed ONLY in pg_controldata. That leaves no
reasonable way to expose this information in an API.
(and yes, we have a bigger issue with stuff which is only in pg_log, but
one thing at a time)
--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Raiskup | 2016-02-17 22:43:32 | Re: [HACKERS] Packaging of postgresql-jdbc |
| Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2016-02-17 22:17:47 | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |