> On May 21, 2026, at 04:43, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 03:53:38PM +0800, Chao Li wrote:
>> With v2, slot_name, sender_host, sender_port, and conninfo are
>> already left NULL while the receiver is in CONNECTING state. I feel
>> we don't have to show the timestamp fields either. Since the columns
>> are named last_msg_send_time and last_msg_receipt_time, users may
>> naturally interpret them as the last time a message was sent to or
>> received from
>> the primary. If we show the standby server start time in those
>> columns, I am afraid that could be confusing.
>>
>> But I think it might be useful to show the *_lsn and *_tli values in
>> CONNECTING state if they are available.
>
> The original reason why ready_to_display has been introduced is this
> one, where we wanted to have a strict control over the connection
> information across multiple calls of pg_stat_get_wal_receiver():
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqQNbHQ7F7wDD_2qvGA_FUW-Leds9HQNM6kJnto7RFNhUg@mail.gmail.com
>
> With v2, ready_to_display is still able to do the job it is defined
> for. This does not need to apply on the time fields, so IMO showing
> them to the values they are initialized is not a big deal, and they
> can actually be useful to know even in the early stage of connection
> as they reveal the state of the code.
>
> Note also that the time values could still show up based on their
> initial values at the early connection stage, even after completing
> walrcv_connect() and after ready_to_display is switched to true, so
> it's not like these values are that confusing: we just expose them a
> bit more at an earlier stage of the connection attempt process. As a
> whole v2 is fine, and addresses your issue.
> --
> Michael
Thanks for the detailed explanation.
Now I see that, based on the original discussion you pointed out, as long as v2 clears conninfo before setting
ready_to_displayto true, it is okay to do that earlier while the state is still CONNECTING. On that point, I’m good
withv2.
I’m still not fully convinced about displaying the *_time fields, but I don’t have a stronger argument either, so I’m
finewith that. Maybe we can add a brief description in the doc like the attached diff?
Overall, v2 looks good to me now.
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
