On 2020/05/20 8:31, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 11:38:52PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
I found that "received_lsn" is still used in high-availability.sgml.
We should apply the following change in high-availability?
- view's received_lsn indicates that WAL is being
+
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 11:38:52PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> I found that "received_lsn" is still used in high-availability.sgml.
> We should apply the following change in high-availability?
>
> - view's received_lsn indicates that WAL is being
> + view's flushed_lsn indicates that WAL i
On 2020/05/17 10:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 10:15:47AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
Thanks. If there are no objections, I'll revisit that tomorrow and
apply it with those changes, just in time for beta1.
Okay, done this part then.
I found that "received_lsn" is s
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 10:15:47AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Thanks. If there are no objections, I'll revisit that tomorrow and
> apply it with those changes, just in time for beta1.
Okay, done this part then.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 07:34:46PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> IIRC the only reason to put the written LSN where it is is so that it's
> below the mutex, to indicate it's not protected by it. Conceptually,
> the written LSN is "before" the flushed LSN, which is why I propose to
> put it ahead o
On 2020-May-16, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 01:43:11PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Why do you put the column at the end? I would put written_lsn before
> > flushed_lsn.
>
> Fine by me. I was thinking yesterday about putting the written
> position after the flushed one,
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 01:43:11PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Why do you put the column at the end? I would put written_lsn before
> flushed_lsn.
Fine by me. I was thinking yesterday about putting the written
position after the flushed one, and finished with something that maps
with the stru
On 2020-May-15, Michael Paquier wrote:
> As discussed in the thread that introduced d140f2f3 to rename
> receivedUpto to flushedUpto and add writtenUpto to the WAL receiver's
> shared memory information, the equivalent columns in
> pg_stat_wal_receiver have not been renamed:
> When I have impleme
