Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Michael Paquier
Тема
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db
Дата
Msg-id
Y3wbe2dnxh9B4fLF@paquier.xyz
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
ps command does not show walsender's connected db bt22nakamorit <bt22nakamorit@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db bt22nakamorit <bt22nakamorit@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db bt22nakamorit <bt22nakamorit@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db bt22nakamorit <bt22nakamorit@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db bt22nakamorit <bt22nakamorit@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: ps command does not show walsender's connected db Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 01:32:11PM +0900, Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
> Fujii-san is marked as committer on the commifest entry for this patch [1];
> are you able to go ahead and get it committed?

That's the state of the patch since the 11th of October.  Seeing the
lack of activity, I propose to take care of that myself if there are
no objections, only on HEAD.  That could be qualified as a bug, but
that does not seem worth bothering the back-branches, either.  Except
if somebody has a different opinion?

The patch looks to do the job correctly, still I would leave the extra
printf() calls in BackendStartup() out.
--
Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Nathan Bossart
Дата:
От: Fujii.Yuki@df.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp
Дата:
FAQ