Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmoa3yydudhGXvDEQi2T4X6DpmGLK438S--pm4QxVQ1tGmw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function  ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Karl O. Pinc <kop@meme.com> wrote:
> If it were me I'd have the documentation mention
> that the pg_current_logfiles() result is
> supplied on a "best effort" basis and under
> rare conditions may be outdated.   The
> sentence in the pg_current_logfles() docs
> which reads "pg_current_logfiles reflects the contents
> of the file current_logfiles." now carries little
> meaning because the current_logfiles docs no
> longer mention that the file content may be outdated.

Generally that's going to be true of any function or SQL statement
that returns data which can change.  The only way it isn't true in
some particular case is if a function has some kind of snapshot
semantics or returns with a lock on the underlying object held.  So it
doesn't seem particularly noteworthy here.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctlstart without --wait
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function