Fujii Masao wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:3f0b79eb1001111945m1d9aa6b6n1a7e62705a00e9fe@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"><pre
wrap="">OnSun, Jan 10, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Simon Riggs <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:simon@2ndquadrant.com"><simon@2ndquadrant.com></a>wrote: </pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre
wrap="">Whatcould happen is that the standby could slowly lag behind master. We
don't have any way of monitoring that, as yet. Setting ps display is not
enough here. </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">
I agree that the statistical information about replication activity is
very useful. But I think that it's not an urgent issue. Shall we think
it later? </pre></blockquote><br /> I don't think anybody can deploy this feature without at least some very basic
monitoringhere. I like the basic proposal you made back in September for adding a pg_standbys_xlog_location to replace
whatyou have to get from ps right now: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg00889.php">http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg00889.php</a><br
/><br/> That's basic, but enough that people could get by for a V1.<br /><br /><pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:greg@2ndQuadrant.com">greg@2ndQuadrant.com</a> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"href="http://www.2ndQuadrant.com">www.2ndQuadrant.com</a>
</pre>