From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_control_recovery() return value when not in recovery |
Date: | 2017-10-14 12:33:19 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTL=JDwMUhOuCoqojtpykrtQ-0nYO8SWQQVhBoaGpMPbQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> wrote:
> Sorry for the slow response, but thinking back on this now, the idea of
> these functions, in my mind at least, was to provide as close to the
> same output as possible to what pg_controldata outputs. So:
>
> # pg_controldata
> ...
> Minimum recovery ending location: 0/0
> Min recovery ending loc's timeline: 0
> Backup start location: 0/0
> Backup end location: 0/0
> End-of-backup record required: no
> ...
>
> So if we make a change here, do we also change pg_controldata?
For a lot of folks on this list, it is clear that things like
InvalidXLogRecPtr map to 0/0, but what of end-users? Couldn't we
consider marking those fields as "undefined" for example. "invalid"
would mean that the state of the cluster is incorrect, so I am not
sure if that is most adapted.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-10-14 13:14:27 | fresh regression - regproc result contains unwanted schema |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-10-14 10:46:12 | Re: BUG #14849: jsonb_build_object doesn't like VARIADIC calls very much |