Re: Replication slots and footguns
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Replication slots and footguns |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYTgPN8OuB+ewAsP6q90-q_1_y99p_seRXG0z=nLZDZqw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Replication slots and footguns (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 8:09 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > On 03/13/2014 05:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: >>> On 03/13/2014 01:17 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>>> I think "in use" is just as clear as active, and I think the text >>>> Andres proposed previously reads a whole lot more nicely than this: >>>> >>>> replication slot "%s" is in use by another backend >>> >>> Then we should change the column name in the pg_stat_replication_slots >>> view to "in_use". My point is that the error message and the diagnostic >>> view should use the same word, or we're needlessly confusing our users. >> >> I see. That's an interesting point.... > > As I said earlier, the fact that the current error message says "active" > and the column in pg_stat_replication_slots is called "active" meant I > knew *immediately* where to look. So I'm speaking from personal experience. Well we may have kind of hosed ourselves, because the in-memory data structures that represent the data structure have an in_use flag that indicates whether the structure is allocated at all, and then an active flag that indicates whether some backend is using it. I never liked that naming much. Maybe we should go through and let in_use -> allocated and active -> in_use. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: