Re: standby apply lag on inactive servers

On 2020/01/31 5:45, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2020-Jan-30, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> 
>> Agreed about backbranches. I'd like to preserve the word "transaction"
>> as it is more familiar to users. How about something like the follows?
>>
>> "transactions are completed up to log time %s"
> 
> That's a good point.  I used the phrase "transaction activity", which
> seems sufficiently explicit to me.
> 
> So, the attached is the one for master; in back branches I would use the
> same (plus minor conflict fixes), except that I would drop the message
> wording changes.

You're thinking to apply this change to the back branches? Sorry
if my understanding is not right. But I don't think that back-patch
is ok because it changes the documented existing behavior
of pg_last_xact_replay_timestamp(). So it looks like the behavior
change not a bug fix.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Advanced Platform Technology Group
Research and Development Headquarters