On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 08:04:44AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 12:35:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Also for sync? sync looks fine as issue_xlog_fsync() is being called in
> XLogWalRcvFlush(), no?
Yes, we're OK for the sync data aggregated in the WAL receiver on
HEAD, as mentioned below, not in the back-branches.
> We're not emitting some statistics, so I think that it's hard for users to
> complain about something they don't/can't see.
One would see idle data in pg_stat_wal on a standby, so the lack of
data could be annoying, but I'm perhaps the only one who noticed
that..
> Same logic as in XLogWrite() and I don't think there is a need for a
> dedicated wait event, so LGTM.
Thanks.
--
Michael
