On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 12:42, Itagaki Takahiro
<itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 19:20, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> "pg_stat_replication" seems to be the most understandable name.
>>
>> Please go with whatever you think best for now. I'm sure people will ask
>> for different names later anyway. Let's get this committed soon, to
>> reduce later patch conflicts. Thanks.
>>
>> Please add sent_location, I will add others.
>
> OK, I added a view named s "pg_stat_replication". The view is basically
> based on Simon's patch, but I just skipped unused WalSnd entreis in
> WalSndCtl rather than return NULLs. The applied patch attached.
>
> I expect we will have two views for master and standby servers:
>
> * pg_stat_replication
> Activity of wal senders in master server.
> * pg_stat_standby (not yet)
> Activity of a wal receiver and a recovery process in standby servers.
Just to keep the bikeshedding up, should it in this case not be
pg_stat_replication_master and pg_stat_replication_standby or such?
Replication applies to both master and slave...
> I didn't use pg_stat_wal_sender/receiver as their names because standby
> activity in slaves could contain not only a wal receiver but also a
> recovery process.
Good point.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/