On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 1:49 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>>>>> Might it be a good idea to put it on it's own row instead of changing
>>>>> the format of an existing row, in order not to break scripts and
>>>>> programs that are parsing the previous output?
>>>>
>>>> Good idea! What row name should we use for the WAL file containing
>>>> REDO record? "Latest checkpoint's REDO file"?
>>>
>>> Sounds good to me. I like the idea, too. The status quo is an
>>> unnecessary nuisance, so this will be a nice usability improvement.
>>
>> Attached patch adds new row "Latest checkpoint's REDO WAL segment:" into
>> the result of pg_controldata. I used the term "WAL segment" for the row name
>> instead of "file" because "WAL segment" is used in another row "Bytes per WAL
>> segment:". But better name?
>
> s/segment/file/g?
Yep, "file" might be more intuitive for a user than "segment". Attached is the
"file" version of the patch.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center