Hi, On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 11:39, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 07:32:01AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > > That sounds ok, but I wonder if that's the best appropriate place. I could > > think of the checkpointer test in 029_stats_restart.pl and the > > startup/standby > > one in one related to standby (030_stats_cleanup_replica.pl?). Though that's > > probably just a matter of taste. > > Hmm. Your suggestion of 029_stats_restart.pl is a tempting choice, > indeed, more in line with the fact that we are checking some stats > data. I did not think about that. > > Note that I'm OK about using 029 or even 030, as long as both queries > stay together.
My vote goes to 029. It already has the '## check checkpoint and wal stats are incremented due to restart' part and what we are adding is similar to that. On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 10:32, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > s/and the primary WAL some writes/and the primary some WAL writes/ I am not a native speaker but 'primary writes some WAL with its checkpointer' sounds better to me. -- Regards, Nazir Bilal Yavuz Microsoft
