Re: Add 'worker_type' to pg_stat_subscription
| От | Nathan Bossart |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Add 'worker_type' to pg_stat_subscription |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20230914220419.GA1904031@nathanxps13 обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Add 'worker_type' to pg_stat_subscription (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Add 'worker_type' to pg_stat_subscription
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 09:59:04AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 05:06:28PM +0300, Maxim Orlov wrote: >> So, should we mark this thread as RfC? > > I've done so. Barring additional feedback, I intend to commit this in the > next few days. I did some staging work for the patch (attached). The one code change I made was for the new test. Instead of adding a new test, I figured we could modify the preceding test to check for the expected worker type instead of whether relid is NULL. ISTM this relid check is intended to filter for the apply worker, anyway. The only reason I didn't apply this already is because IMHO we should adjust the worker types and the documentation for the view to be consistent. For example, the docs say "leader apply worker" but the view just calls them "apply" workers. The docs say "synchronization worker" but the view calls them "table synchronization" workers. My first instinct is to call apply workers "leader apply" workers in the view, and to call table synchronization workers "table synchronization workers" in the docs. Thoughts? -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: