Re: Basebackups reported as idle - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Basebackups reported as idle
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqRBYp=miw2LchSsUgDLjdUTUqNp4Bi_U8=fg+M+45Gk4g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Basebackups reported as idle  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Responses Re: Basebackups reported as idle  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 9:02 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes. Of course. I can't read. That's the same as the notice below about it
> not returning false -- I managed to miss the extra if() there, and thought
> it always exited with ERROR.

I think that the call to pgstat_report_activity in WalSndLoop() should
be kept as well. There is a small gap between the moment the process
is started and the first replication command is run.

>> +   /* Report to pgstat that this process is running */
>> +   pgstat_report_activity(STATE_RUNNING, NULL);
>> Bonus points if cmd_string is used instead of string? This way, you
>> can know what is the replication command running ;)
>
> Do we want that though? That would be a compat break at least, wouldn't it?

Perhaps not, I found the idea funky but you actually don't want to
show a string in exec_replication_command for a T_SQLCmd node. That's
not complicated to check either. So let's discard such a thing for
now.
-- 
Michael


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Haisheng Yuan
Date:
Subject: Re: Bitmap table scan cost per page formula
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Tracking of page changes for backup purposes. PTRACK [POC]