Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-03-15 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> >>> I haven't looked through the code in detail, but one direct comment: >>> do we really need/want to send this through the s

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-03-09 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >> I haven't looked through the code in detail, but one direct comment: >> do we really need/want to send this through the stats collector? It >> will only ever have one sender - per

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-02-14 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Jaime Casanova's message of mar feb 14 04:10:58 -0300 2012: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > > I haven't looked through the code in detail, but one direct comment: > > do we really need/want to send this through the stats collector? It > > will only eve

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-02-13 Thread Jaime Casanova
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > I haven't looked through the code in detail, but one direct comment: > do we really need/want to send this through the stats collector? It > will only ever have one sender - perhaps we should just either store > it in shared memory or stor

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-02-02 Thread Bernd Helmle
--On 2. Februar 2012 17:12:11 +0900 Fujii Masao wrote: If only core developer is interested in this view, ISTM that short description for each WAL record is not required because he or she can know the meaning of each WAL record by reading the source code. No? Adding short descriptions for eve

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-02-02 Thread Fujii Masao
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 08:26, Jaime Casanova wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > > --On 15. Januar 2012 02:50:00 -0500 Jaime Casanova > wrote: > >> Attached is a patch thats implements a pg_s

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-02-02 Thread Fujii Masao
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: --On 15. Januar 2012 02:50:00 -0500 Jaime Casanova wrote: > Attached is a patch thats implements a pg_stat_recovery view that > keeps counters about processed wa

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-02-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 08:26, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: --On 15. Januar 2012 02:50:00 -0500 Jaime Casanova wrote: > Attached is a patch thats implements a pg_stat_recovery view that > keeps counters about processed wal

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-02-01 Thread Jaime Casanova
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >>> >>> --On 15. Januar 2012 02:50:00 -0500 Jaime Casanova >>> wrote: >>> Attached is a patch thats implements a pg_stat_recovery view that keeps counters about processed wal records. I just notice that it still lacks documentation

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-02-01 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Bernd Helmle wrote: >> >> >> --On 15. Januar 2012 02:50:00 -0500 Jaime Casanova >> wrote: >> >>> Attached is a patch thats implements a pg_stat_recovery view that >>> keeps counters about processed wal reco

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stats_recovery view

2012-01-26 Thread Bernd Helmle
--On 15. Januar 2012 02:50:00 -0500 Jaime Casanova wrote: Attached is a patch thats implements a pg_stat_recovery view that keeps counters about processed wal records. I just notice that it still lacks documentation but i will add it during the week. Hi Jaime, do you have an updated patc