Re: WAL-logging facility for pgstats kinds

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WAL-logging facility for pgstats kinds
Date: 2025-02-10 16:43:30
Message-ID: sfkezoorr3ww4oseakml7n4dyoprt7ffmvnuqryh7dn36nlzj3@lrxhhd23nn3b
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2025-01-14 12:54:36 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 01:46:53PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > I'd rather use RecoveryInProgress() here even if XLogInsertAllowed()
> > is a synonym of that, minus the update of LocalXLogInsertAllowed for
> > the local process.
>
> I've applied v2-0002 for the new header as it is useful on its own.
> Rebased to avoid the wrath of the CF bot, as v3.

Because I saw this being moved to the new CF: I continue to *strenuously*
object to this design. As outlined upthread, I think it's going into the
completely wrong direction.

- Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2025-02-10 16:44:01 Re: Enhance 'pg_createsubscriber' to retrieve databases automatically when no database is provided.
Previous Message Ilia Evdokimov 2025-02-10 16:38:50 Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f