| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: add recovery, backup, archive, streaming etc. activity messages to server logs along with ps display |
| Date: | 2021-12-08 08:38:14 |
| Message-ID: | YbBu9neQfIivdM2M@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 02:00:12PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> For standby, "received from primary" makes sense. For cascading
> standby too it makes sense because the standby still acts as primary
> for cascading standby, no? And we don't distinguish any other existing
> messages for a standby acting as a cascading standby right? The
> comments around the enum XLOG_FROM_STREAM and usage of it still says
> from "primary".
Quoting the docs:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/glossary.html#GLOSSARY-PRIMARY-SERVER
And a standby is no such thing.
> Do you want me to add "received from stream" in general?
"from stream" would be fine, IMHO.
> How about we invent a new GUC log_recovery, with default set to false,
> similar to log_checkpoints? And, these messages can be like:
> ereport(log_recovery ? LOG : DEBUG1, .....)? This GUC can be useful to
> add some recovery stats in future as well. Thoughts?
This discussion does not justify a new GUC at this stage IMO.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-12-08 08:54:37 | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |
| Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2021-12-08 08:30:12 | Re: add recovery, backup, archive, streaming etc. activity messages to server logs along with ps display |