Re: timestamp of the last replayed transaction
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: timestamp of the last replayed transaction |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTin-Tp6hfhQyWuoUvVWfw1Pb-yOf6=KYz6Bhr4-s@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: timestamp of the last replayed transaction (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: timestamp of the last replayed transaction
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 9:00 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Dimitri Fontaine >> <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr> wrote: >>> Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes: >>>> After 9.0 release, I've often heard that some people want to know >>>> how far transactions have been replayed in the standby in timestamp >>>> rather than LSN. So I'm thinking to include the function which returns >>>> the timestamp of the last applied transaction (i.e., commit/abort WAL >>>> record) in the core. >>>> >>>> Name: pg_last_replay_xact_timestamp (better name?) >>>> Return Type: timestamp with time zone >>>> >>>> Thought? >>> >>> How do you want to implement the tracking? >> >> I'm thinking to just expose GetLatestXTime(), i.e., XLogCtl->recoveryLastXTime. > > I attached the patch. This looks good, but how about adding: if (!RecoveryInProgress()) PG_RETURN_NULL(); Otherwise, if we're in Hot Standby mode for a while and then enter normal running, wouldn't this still return a (stale) value? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: