On 21 March 2017 at 17:32, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On 3/15/17 8:38 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 16 March 2017 at 08:02, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that these states exist, but we disagree on what 'lag' really
>>> means, or, rather, which of several plausible definitions would be the
>>> most useful here.
>>>
>>> My proposal is that the *_lag columns should always report how long it
>>> took for recently written, flushed and applied WAL to be written,
>>> flushed and applied (and for the primary to know about it). By this
>>> definition, sent LSN = applied LSN is not a special case: we simply
>>> report how long that LSN took to be written, flushed and applied.
>>>
>>> Your proposal is that the *_lag columns should report how far in the
>>> past the standby is at each of the three stages with respect to the
>>> current end of WAL. By this definition when sent LSN = applied LSN we
>>> are currently in the 'A' state meaning 'caught up' and should show
>>> 00:00:00.
>>
>>
>> I accept your proposal for how we handle these, on condition that you
>> write up some docs that explain the subtle difference between the two,
>> so we can just show people the URL. That needs to explain clearly the
>> difference in an impartial way between "what is the most recent lag
>> measurement" and "how long until we are caught up" as possible
>> intrepretations of these values. Thanks.
>
>
> This thread has been idle for six days. Please respond and/or post a new
> patch by 2017-03-24 00:00 AoE (UTC-12) or this submission will be marked
> "Returned with Feedback".
Thomas, Are you working on another version even? You've not replied to
me or David, so its difficult to know what next.
Not sure whether this a 6 day lag, or we should show NULL because we
are up to date.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
