On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 2:29 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 5:53 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Some review comments for v2-0001. > > > > ====== > > doc/src/sgml/system-views.sgml > > > > 1. > > The time when the slot became inactive. NULL if the slot is currently > > being streamed. If the slot becomes invalid, this value will never be > > updated. Note that for slots on the standby that are being synced from > > a primary server (whose synced field is true), the inactive_since > > indicates the time when slot synchronization (see Section 47.2.3) was > > most recently stopped. NULL if the slot has always been synchronized. > > On standby, this is useful for slots that are being synced from a > > primary server (whose synced field is true) so they know when the slot > > stopped being synchronized. > > > > ~ > > > > (maybe not strictly related to this patch, but perhaps you can fix it > > in passing because it will help the readability of the newly added > > sentence also...) > > > > There are 2 different explanations for NULL: > > "NULL if the slot is currently being streamed." > > "NULL if the slot has always been synchronized." > > > > I'm assuming that 2nd description is only to be read in the scope of > > "Note that for slots on the standby that are being synced from a > > primary server...". IMO inserting a blank line before "Note that for > > slots on the standby..." will help separate these two quite different > > descriptions for the same field. > > > > This is unrelated to this patch, but I don't mind you proposing a > separate patch if you feel it will make it clear. Did you see separate > paragraphs in other descriptions? >
OK, I have started a new thread [1] for this. ====== [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHut%2BPssvVMTWVtUPto6HbPO8pgVsvtzndt_FdBomA_Oq4zf3w%40mail.gmail.com Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia
