Horton

Thread

Commits

  1. doc: mention wal_receiver_status_interval as GUC affecting logical rep worker.

  1. Missing wal_receiver_status_interval in Subscribers section

    Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> — 2017-11-17T09:34:29Z

    Hi,

I found that the doc says in 19.6.4. Subscribers section that "Note
that wal_receiver_timeout and wal_retrieve_retry_interval
configuration parameters affect the logical replication workers as
well" but subscriber actually uses wal_receiver_status_interval as
well. So I think we should mention it as well. Any thoughts?

Attached patch adds wal_receiver_stats_interval to the doc.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

  2. Re: Missing wal_receiver_status_interval in Subscribers section

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2018-01-23T23:36:04Z

    Can someone confirm this so I can apply this patch?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 06:34:29PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I found that the doc says in 19.6.4. Subscribers section that "Note
> that wal_receiver_timeout and wal_retrieve_retry_interval
> configuration parameters affect the logical replication workers as
> well" but subscriber actually uses wal_receiver_status_interval as
> well. So I think we should mention it as well. Any thoughts?
> 
> Attached patch adds wal_receiver_stats_interval to the doc.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --
> Masahiko Sawada
> NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
> NTT Open Source Software Center

> diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
> index 996e825..3c8c504 100644
> --- a/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
> +++ b/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
> @@ -3410,7 +3410,8 @@ ANY <replaceable class="parameter">num_sync</replaceable> ( <replaceable class="
>       </para>
>  
>       <para>
> -      Note that <varname>wal_receiver_timeout</varname> and
> +      Note that <varname>wal_receiver_timeout</varname>,
> +      <varname>wal_receiver_status_interval</varname> and
>        <varname>wal_retrieve_retry_interval</varname> configuration parameters
>        affect the logical replication workers as well.
>       </para>


-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +

  3. Re: Missing wal_receiver_status_interval in Subscribers section

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2018-01-24T00:34:38Z

    On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 06:36:04PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> Can someone confirm this so I can apply this patch?

Never mind.  I see this was applied:

	doc: mention wal_receiver_status_interval as GUC affecting logical rep worker.
	
	wal_receiver_timeout, wal_receiver_status_interval and
	wal_retrieve_retry_interval configuration parameters affect the logical rep
	worker, but previously only wal_receiver_status_interval was not mentioned
	as such parameter in the doc.
	
	Back-patch to v10 where logical rep was added.
	
	Author: Masahiko Sawada
	Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD21AoBUnuH_UsnKXyPCsCR7EAMamW0sSb6a7=WgiQRpnMAp5w@mail.gmail.com

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +

  4. Re: Missing wal_receiver_status_interval in Subscribers section

    Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> — 2018-01-24T01:38:57Z

    On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 9:34 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 06:36:04PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>> Can someone confirm this so I can apply this patch?
>
> Never mind.  I see this was applied:
>

Thank you for your kind response.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center