Обсуждение: Adding in docs the meaning of pg_stat_replication.sync_state
Hi all, The documentation does not explain at all what means "sync" or "async" on pg_stat_replication. The paragraph "Planning for high availability" mentions "catchup" and "streaming", but it does not say that users can refer to it directly in pg_stat_replication. Thoughts about the patch attached to add a couple of sentences in "Planning for high availability"? We could as well mention it directly in the page of pg_stat_replication but this information seems more suited if located in the HA section. Thanks, -- Michael
Вложения
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > The documentation does not explain at all what means "sync" or "async" > on pg_stat_replication. "potential" state also should be explained? > The paragraph "Planning for high availability" > mentions "catchup" and "streaming", but it does not say that users can > refer to it directly in pg_stat_replication. > > Thoughts about the patch attached to add a couple of sentences in > "Planning for high availability"? We could as well mention it directly > in the page of pg_stat_replication but this information seems more > suited if located in the HA section. Yeah, I think it's better to mention them even in pg_stat_replication page. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The documentation does not explain at all what means "sync" or "async" >> on pg_stat_replication. > > "potential" state also should be explained? Of course. >> The paragraph "Planning for high availability" >> mentions "catchup" and "streaming", but it does not say that users can >> refer to it directly in pg_stat_replication. >> >> Thoughts about the patch attached to add a couple of sentences in >> "Planning for high availability"? We could as well mention it directly >> in the page of pg_stat_replication but this information seems more >> suited if located in the HA section. > > Yeah, I think it's better to mention them even in pg_stat_replication page. OK, so I have done things this way. What do you think? At the same time it would be good to mention all the possible field values in "state", aka streaming, catchup, etc so I added that as well. -- Michael
Вложения
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Michael Paquier >> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> The documentation does not explain at all what means "sync" or "async" >>> on pg_stat_replication. >> >> "potential" state also should be explained? > > Of course. > >>> The paragraph "Planning for high availability" >>> mentions "catchup" and "streaming", but it does not say that users can >>> refer to it directly in pg_stat_replication. >>> >>> Thoughts about the patch attached to add a couple of sentences in >>> "Planning for high availability"? We could as well mention it directly >>> in the page of pg_stat_replication but this information seems more >>> suited if located in the HA section. >> >> Yeah, I think it's better to mention them even in pg_stat_replication page. > > OK, so I have done things this way. What do you think? At the same > time it would be good to mention all the possible field values in > "state", aka streaming, catchup, etc so I added that as well. Thanks for the patch! + <literal>backup</>: The WAL sender is sending a backup. Seems it's better to use "This WAL sender" rather than "The WAL sender" like the descriptions of other fields. There are two descriptions of "streaming" value. You need to remove either of them. + <literal>streaming</>: The WAL sender is catching up with the + primary. "walsender is catching up with the primary" sounds a bit strange to me. What about "This WAL sender's connected standby server is catching up with the primary"? + <literal>streaming</>: The WAL sender has caught up with the + primary and is streaming changes. Same as above. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > + <literal>backup</>: The WAL sender is sending a backup. > > Seems it's better to use "This WAL sender" rather than "The WAL sender" > like the descriptions of other fields. > > There are two descriptions of "streaming" value. You need to remove > either of them. > > + <literal>streaming</>: The WAL sender is catching up with the > + primary. > > "walsender is catching up with the primary" sounds a bit strange to me. > What about "This WAL sender's connected standby server is catching up > with the primary"? > > + <literal>streaming</>: The WAL sender has caught up with the > + primary and is streaming changes. > > Same as above. Agreed with all that. Attached is an updated version. -- Michael
Вложения
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: >> + <literal>backup</>: The WAL sender is sending a backup. >> >> Seems it's better to use "This WAL sender" rather than "The WAL sender" >> like the descriptions of other fields. >> >> There are two descriptions of "streaming" value. You need to remove >> either of them. >> >> + <literal>streaming</>: The WAL sender is catching up with the >> + primary. >> >> "walsender is catching up with the primary" sounds a bit strange to me. >> What about "This WAL sender's connected standby server is catching up >> with the primary"? >> >> + <literal>streaming</>: The WAL sender has caught up with the >> + primary and is streaming changes. >> >> Same as above. > > Agreed with all that. Attached is an updated version. Thanks for updating the patch! Attached is the updated version of the patch. I changed the order of descriptions of the walsender state in intuitive one rather than alphabetical one. Also I enhanced the description of "potential" state. Could you review the latest patch? Regards, -- Fujii Masao
Вложения
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > I changed the order of descriptions of the walsender state in > intuitive one rather than alphabetical one. Also I enhanced > the description of "potential" state. > > Could you review the latest patch? Fine for me. The additions in high-availability.sgml are a good idea. -- Michael
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: >> I changed the order of descriptions of the walsender state in >> intuitive one rather than alphabetical one. Also I enhanced >> the description of "potential" state. >> >> Could you review the latest patch? > > Fine for me. The additions in high-availability.sgml are a good idea. Pushed. Thanks! Regards, -- Fujii Masao