Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> writes:
> That was interesting: the order that WAL segments are archived when a
> standby is promoted is not fully deterministic.
Oh, of course.
> I find it a bit surprising that pg_stat_archiver.last_archived_wal is
> not necessarily the highest-numbered segment that was archived. I
> propose that we mention that in the docs, as in the attached patch.
+1, but I think the description of that field in the pg-stat-archiver-view
table is also pretty misleading. Maybe like
- Name of the last WAL file successfully archived
+ Name of the WAL file most recently successfully archived
and similarly s/last/most recent/ for the other fields claiming
to be "last" something.
regards, tom lane
