On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 04:41:47PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > I still think this whole direction of accessing the GUC in walreceiver > is a bad idea and shouldn't be pursued further. There's definite > potential for startup process and WAL receiver having different states > of GUCs, the code doesn't get meaningfully simpler, the GUC value checks > in walreceiver make for horrible reporting up the chain.
Did you notice the set of messages from upthread? The code *gets* simpler by removing ready_to_display and the need to manipulate the non-clobbered connection string sent directly from the startup process. In my opinion that's a clear gain. We gain also the possibility to track down that a WAL receiver is started but not connected yet for monitoring tools. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
