Re: pg_controldata gobbledygook - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pg_controldata gobbledygook
Date
Msg-id 29207.1366946354@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to pg_controldata gobbledygook  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: pg_controldata gobbledygook
Re: pg_controldata gobbledygook
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> The comments in the pg_control.h header file use much more pleasant
> terms, which when put to use would lead to output similar to this:

> Latest checkpoint's next free transaction ID:             0/7575
> Latest checkpoint's next free OID:                        49152
> Latest checkpoint's next free MultiXactId:                7
> Latest checkpoint's next free MultiXact offset:           13
> Latest checkpoint's cluster-wide minimum datfrozenxid:    1265
> Latest checkpoint's database with cluster-wide minimum datfrozenxid:  1
> Latest checkpoint's oldest transaction ID still running:  0
> Latest checkpoint's cluster-wide minimum datminmxid:      1
> Latest checkpoint's database with cluster-wide minimum datminmxid:  1

> One could even rearrange the layout a little bit like this:

> Control data as of latest checkpoint:
>     next free transaction ID:             0/7575
>     next free OID:                        49152
> etc.

> Comments?

I think I've heard of scripts grepping the output of pg_controldata for
this that or the other.  Any rewording of the labels would break that.
While I'm not opposed to improving the labels, I would vote against your
second, abbreviated scheme because it would make things ambiguous for
simple grep-based scripts.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: pg_controldata gobbledygook
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_controldata gobbledygook