Horton

Re: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver

Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>, Vik Fearing <vik@2ndquadrant.fr>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-06-30T23:50:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Yeah, I know. Now my opinion regarding this view is that we should
>> show information about a currently-working WAL receiver, and that it
>> has nothing to do with reporting information of its previous startup state.
>> That's more consistent with the WAL sender.
>
> Okay, that argument I buy.
>
> I suppose this function/view should report no row at all if there is no
> wal receiver connected, rather than a view with nulls.

The function returns PG_RETURN_NULL() so as we don't have to use a
SRF, and the view checks for IS NOT NULL, so there would be no rows
popping up.
-- 
Michael

Commits

  1. Add conninfo to pg_stat_wal_receiver

  2. Only show pg_stat_replication details to superusers