Re: pg_stat_replication vs StandbyReplyMessage - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: pg_stat_replication vs StandbyReplyMessage
Date
Msg-id CABUevEwYEmRpDe=NLeqd8dgpe-jqc1pN1fLfwvwpK6ZrbL+W=A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_stat_replication vs StandbyReplyMessage  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: pg_stat_replication vs StandbyReplyMessage
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 01:03:35PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> The pg_stat_replication view exposes all the fields in
>> StandbyReplyMessage *except* for the timestamp when the message was
>> generated. On an active system this is not all that interesting, but
>> on a mostly idle system that allows the monitoring to react faster
>> than the timeout that actually kicks the other end off - and could be
>> useful in manual debugging scenarios. Any particular reason why this
>> was not exposed as it's own column?
>
> Did this ever get done?  I don't think so, though everyone wanted it.

Nope, it wasn't done. Should probably do that for 9.3 (since adding a
field to pg_stat_replication will cause initdb, so we can't really do
it for 9.2 unless it was really critical - and it's not).

-- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: plperl crash with Debian 6 (64 bit), pl/perlu, libwww and https
Next
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: alter enum add value if not exists