Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-02-22T03:37:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 9:37 PM David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 2:19 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 1:18 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: >> >> > > The view name could be pg_stat_subscription_lrep, >> > > pg_stat_logical_replication, or something on those lines. >> > >> > pg_stat_subscription_stats :) >> > >> >> Having *stat* two times in the name sounds slightly odd to me but let >> us see what others think. One more option could be >> pg_stat_subscription_replication. >> > > Agreed. > > pg_stat_subscription_activity > > We already have pg_stat_activity (which may be an argument against the suggestion...) > I don't know if that can be an argument against it but one can imagine that we record other subscription changes like (change of publications, etc.). I personally feel it may be better to add '_replication' in some way like pg_stat_sub_replication_activity but I am fine either way. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
Commits
-
Reconsider pg_stat_subscription_workers view.
- 7a8507329085 15.0 landed
-
Add a view to show the stats of subscription workers.
- 8d74fc96db5f 15.0 cited