From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, Gilles Darold <gilles(dot)darold(at)dalibo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Patch pg_is_in_backup() |
Date: | 2012-02-03 09:52:09 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEzi=Fa5xUDRYUkCX3jeE26Y3F3AsO9T_yZQPUzYANdPpg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 10:47, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> wrote:
>>
>>
>> --On 3. Februar 2012 13:21:11 +0900 Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> It seems to be more user-friendly to introduce a view like pg_stat_backup
>>> rather than the function returning an array.
>>
>>
>> I like this idea. A use case i saw for monitoring backup_label's in the
>> past, was mainly to discover a forgotten exclusive pg_stop_backup() (e.g.
>> due to broken backup scripts). If the view would be able to distinguish
>> both, exclusive and non-exclusive backups, this would be great.
>
> Agreed. Monitoring an exclusive backup is very helpful. But I wonder
> why we want to monitor non-exclusive backup. Is there any use case?
Actually, we can already monitor much of the non-exclusive one through
pg_stat_replication. Including the info on when it was started (at
least in almost every case, that will be more or less the
backend_start time for that one)
> If we want to monitor non-exclusive backup, why not pg_dump backup?
.. which we can also monitor though pg_stat_activity by looking at
application_name (which can be faked of course, but still)
> If there is no use case, it seems sufficient to implement the function
> which reports the information only about exclusive backup.
Yeah, thinking more of it, i think I agree. But the function should
then probably be named in such a way that it's clear that we're
talking about exclusive backups, e.g. not pg_is_in_backup() but
instead pg_is_in_exclusive_backup() (renamed if we change it to return
the timestamp instead, of course, but you get the idea)
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2012-02-03 09:55:42 | Re: Patch pg_is_in_backup() |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2012-02-03 09:47:55 | Re: Patch pg_is_in_backup() |