On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 04:56, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> I think pg_stat_replication is better than pg_stat_standby, but I'm >> still not convinced we shouldn't go with the obvious >> pg_stat_walsenders. > > How about pg_stat_replication_activity? If I understood correctly, the view > is similar to pg_stat_activity, but displays information about connected > standbys rather than regular backends. It's a bit long name, though.
The view currently discussed is for *master* servers. We might have some views for replication activity in *standby* servers. So, I'd like to choose consistent and symmetric names for them -- for example, pg_stat_replication_master and pg_stat_replication_standby. I've expected they will be pg_stat_wal_[senders|receivers] when I was writing the patch, but any other better names welcome. However, we have "max_wal_senders" GUC parameter. So, users still need to know what "wal_senders" is. -- Itagaki Takahiro -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
