Re: [HACKERS] pg_control_recovery() return value when not in recovery - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [HACKERS] pg_control_recovery() return value when not in recovery
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqTL=JDwMUhOuCoqojtpykrtQ-0nYO8SWQQVhBoaGpMPbQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] pg_control_recovery() return value when not in recovery  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote:
> Sorry for the slow response, but thinking back on this now, the idea of
> these functions, in my mind at least, was to provide as close to the
> same output as possible to what pg_controldata outputs. So:
>
> # pg_controldata
> ...
> Minimum recovery ending location:     0/0
> Min recovery ending loc's timeline:   0
> Backup start location:                0/0
> Backup end location:                  0/0
> End-of-backup record required:        no
> ...
>
> So if we make a change here, do we also change pg_controldata?

For a lot of folks on this list, it is clear that things like
InvalidXLogRecPtr map to 0/0, but what of end-users? Couldn't we
consider marking those fields as "undefined" for example. "invalid"
would mean that the state of the cluster is incorrect, so I am not
sure if that is most adapted.
-- 
Michael


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: legrand legrand
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Continuous integration on Windows?
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] fresh regression - regproc result contains unwanted schema