Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 20.10.2010 18:06, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> Apart this, I wonder why walsender/walreceiver do not transfer archive
>> logs as well.
>
> What do you mean?
I'd be pleased if Tatsuo idea have anything to do with this mail:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/m23
On 20.10.2010 18:06, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
This returns 'false' if you're in hot standby mode running against an
archive. That seems wrong, I don't think the walreceiver state should
play any role in this.
Apart this, I wonder why walsender/walreceiver do not transfer archive
logs as well.
What
> This returns 'false' if you're in hot standby mode running against an
> archive. That seems wrong, I don't think the walreceiver state should
> play any role in this.
Apart this, I wonder why walsender/walreceiver do not transfer archive
logs as well.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 20.10.2010 17:32, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
pg_is_in_recovery() returns a bool, are you proposing to change that?
>>>
>>> No. I just thought about adding more condition when it returns true.
>>
>> Here is the patch. Comments are
On 20.10.2010 17:32, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
pg_is_in_recovery() returns a bool, are you proposing to change that?
No. I just thought about adding more condition when it returns true.
Here is the patch. Comments are welcome!
...
Datum
pg_is_in_recovery(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
{
! /* use
>> pg_is_in_recovery() returns a bool, are you proposing to change that?
>
> No. I just thought about adding more condition when it returns true.
Here is the patch. Comments are welcome!
*** a/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
--- b/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
***
*** 5604,5610
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 7:35 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>> What new public interfaces do you think are needed for 9.1 in this
>>> regard?
>>
>> At this point I'm thinking of modifying existing pg_is_in_recovery(),
>> thus 0 new public interface.
>
> pg_is_in_recovery() returns a bool, are you pro
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 7:35 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> What new public interfaces do you think are needed for 9.1 in this
>> regard?
>
> At this point I'm thinking of modifying existing pg_is_in_recovery(),
> thus 0 new public interface.
pg_is_in_recovery() returns a bool, are you proposing to c
> What new public interfaces do you think are needed for 9.1 in this
> regard?
At this point I'm thinking of modifying existing pg_is_in_recovery(),
thus 0 new public interface. The heart of the function is
RecoveryInProgress(). It simply returns LocalRecoveryInProgress. In
addition to that, check
What new public interfaces do you think are needed for 9.1 in this
regard?
Cheers,
David.
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:10:14AM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Ok, it seems impossible to do that by using any public interfaces
> currently available in PostgreSQL 9.0. I will create a custom C
> function t
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> Ok, it seems impossible to do that by using any public interfaces
>> currently available in PostgreSQL 9.0. I will create a custom C
>> function to be distributed along with pgpool-II.
>
> Could you submit the function for 9.1? Thanks :-)
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Ok, it seems impossible to do that by using any public interfaces
> currently available in PostgreSQL 9.0. I will create a custom C
> function to be distributed along with pgpool-II.
Could you submit the function for 9.1? Thanks :-)
--
Ita
Ok, it seems impossible to do that by using any public interfaces
currently available in PostgreSQL 9.0. I will create a custom C
function to be distributed along with pgpool-II.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp
> H
Hi,
I'm looking for a way to reliably detect if it's a promoting
standby. This is neccessary for pgpool-II manage streaming replication
clusters. When primary goes down, standby *could* start promoting to
primary. The only way to find it is calling
pg_is_in_recovery(). Problem is, it returns true
14 matches
Mail list logo