Horton

Re: [HACKERS] Replication status in logical replication

David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@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: 2018-04-10T14:11:43Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 4/10/18 6:14 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 5:37 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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?
>>
> 
> Should I add this item to "Older Bugs" of the open item since we
> regarded it as a bug?

I'm going to reclassify this as a bug since everyone seems to agree it
is one.

Simon, are you still planning to commit this?

Thanks,
-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net

Commits

  1. Make logical WAL sender report streaming state appropriately