Re: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqQBePNnT2LjJ1b63WU7A8UWH3aSdO88VLCv07ww9oof=g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Yeah, I know. Now my opinion regarding this view is that we should
>> show information about a currently-working WAL receiver, and that it
>> has nothing to do with reporting information of its previous startup state.
>> That's more consistent with the WAL sender.
>
> Okay, that argument I buy.
>
> I suppose this function/view should report no row at all if there is no
> wal receiver connected, rather than a view with nulls.

The function returns PG_RETURN_NULL() so as we don't have to use a
SRF, and the view checks for IS NOT NULL, so there would be no rows
popping up.
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver
Next
From: Marko Tiikkaja
Date:
Subject: Allow INSTEAD OF DELETE triggers to modify the tuple for RETURNING