Horton

Re: [HACKERS] Replication status in logical replication

Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, Vaishnavi Prabakaran <vaishnaviprabakaran@gmail.com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-03-29T20:37:47Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 2:16 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 16 January 2018 at 06:21, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:40:43AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>> On 9 January 2018 at 04:36, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> We're not talking about standbys, so the message is incorrect.
>>>
>>> Ah, I understood. How about "\"%s\"  has now caught up with upstream
>>> server"?
>>
>> +1.
>
> upstream is what I would have suggested, so +1 here also.
>
> Will commit.

ping?

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao

Commits

  1. Make logical WAL sender report streaming state appropriately