Documentaion fix.

On 2018-Jul-31, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:

But, just fixing it makes the line seemingly a bit too long..

How about pasting it like this?

alvherre=# select * from pg_replication_slots \gx
─[ RECORD 1 ]───────┬────────────
slot_name │ node_a_slot
plugin │
slot_type │ physical
datoid │
database │
temporary │ f
active │ f
active_pid │
xmin │
catalog_xmin │
restart_lsn │
confirmed_flush_lsn │

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:59:14AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

How about pasting it like this?

alvherre=# select * from pg_replication_slots \gx
─[ RECORD 1 ]───────┬────────────
slot_name │ node_a_slot
plugin │
slot_type │ physical
datoid │
database │
temporary │ f
active │ f
active_pid │
xmin │
catalog_xmin │
restart_lsn │
confirmed_flush_lsn │

Each time this catalog is changed, this would become incorrect. My
suggestion would be to change the query to that and call it a day:
SELECT slot_name, slot_type, active FROM pg_replication_slots;
--
Michael

At Wed, 1 Aug 2018 02:47:32 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote in <20180731174732.GD2878@paquier.xyz>

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:59:14AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

How about pasting it like this?

alvherre=# select * from pg_replication_slots \gx
─[ RECORD 1 ]───────┬────────────
slot_name │ node_a_slot
plugin │
slot_type │ physical
datoid │
database │
temporary │ f
active │ f
active_pid │
xmin │
catalog_xmin │
restart_lsn │
confirmed_flush_lsn │

Each time this catalog is changed, this would become incorrect. My
suggestion would be to change the query to that and call it a day:
SELECT slot_name, slot_type, active FROM pg_replication_slots;

Yeah, I'm also concerned about the unstability. I didn't came up
with a list of columns that makes sense at that time but I
rethought on that.

slot_name │ required
plugin │ <not requried for physical slots>
slot_type │ required
datoid │ <not requried>
database │ <not requried>
temporary │ <not requried>
active │ required?
active_pid │ <not requried>
xmin │ <not requried>
catalog_xmin │ <not requried>
restart_lsn │ better to be shown?
confirmed_flush_lsn │ <not requried for physical slots>

The query and the result with four columns fit the current width.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 01:04:37PM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:

The query and the result with four columns fit the current width.

Just wondering, what is your reason behind the addition of restart_lsn?
This part of the documentation focuses on slot creation, so slot_name,
slot_type and active would be representative enough, no?
--
Michael

At Fri, 3 Aug 2018 04:13:56 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote in <20180802191356.GB2247@paquier.xyz>

On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 01:04:37PM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:

The query and the result with four columns fit the current width.

Just wondering, what is your reason behind the addition of restart_lsn?
This part of the documentation focuses on slot creation, so slot_name,
slot_type and active would be representative enough, no?

The first reason was the example looks having a bit too many
space around only with three other columns.

A more serious reason is that I wanted to show a slot with what
properties is created in the example and I thought that
restart_lsn and temporary are significant. Howerver restart_lsn
is always a part of the pg_replication_slots, we don't have
"temprary" before 10. Addition to that, adding it makes the
SELECT line stick out of the width.

That said, I don't object to reduce the columns. Please find the
attached.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

On 2018-Aug-03, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:

That said, I don't object to reduce the columns. Please find the
attached.

Thanks, pushed.

--
�lvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 04:37:05PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

On 2018-Aug-03, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:

That said, I don't object to reduce the columns. Please find the
attached.

Thanks, pushed.

Thanks Alvaro for keeping the three-column version, I was going to look
at the proposed patch and push as you did, until I noticed that you
showed up :)
--
Michael

At Sat, 4 Aug 2018 05:58:52 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote in <20180803205852.GB20967@paquier.xyz>

On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 04:37:05PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

On 2018-Aug-03, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:

That said, I don't object to reduce the columns. Please find the
attached.

Thanks, pushed.

Thanks Alvaro for keeping the three-column version, I was going to look
at the proposed patch and push as you did, until I noticed that you
showed up :)

Thanks.

# I noticed that the subject has typo..

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

On 2018-Aug-09, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:

# I noticed that the subject has typo..

Yeah. I suggest never changing subject lines, because Gmail has the
nasty (mis-)feature of making such a response into a completely new
thread. I don't know if Google paid mail service behaves in the same
way.

So if you change Subject, please do include a URL to the previous thread
if necessary, for the benefit of people reading on Gmail.

I wouldn't worry about this for any other individual email provider, but
Gmail is by far the largest fraction of subscribers :-( I guess this
shows just how much better Google made webmail systems than what existed
at the time.

--
�lvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 03:58:09PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Yeah. I suggest never changing subject lines, because Gmail has the
nasty (mis-)feature of making such a response into a completely new
thread. I don't know if Google paid mail service behaves in the same
way.

If one uses Gmail with another client like mutt, then those don't get
broken. I don't know about Thunderbird which I believe people use a
lot.

So if you change Subject, please do include a URL to the previous thread
if necessary, for the benefit of people reading on Gmail.

+1.

I wouldn't worry about this for any other individual email provider, but
Gmail is by far the largest fraction of subscribers :-( I guess this
shows just how much better Google made webmail systems than what existed
at the time.

If something is free, you are the product, still I have to admit that
Gmail is not especially bad.
--
Michael

On 2018-Aug-03, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

On 2018-Aug-03, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:

That said, I don't object to reduce the columns. Please find the
attached.

Thanks, pushed.

I had failed to push in the 9.4 branch. Done now.

--
�lvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 02:35:56PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

I had failed to push in the 9.4 branch. Done now.

Thanks Alvaro for working on the details. I would not have bothered
much myself as the set of columns was correct in 9.4, but for
consistency's sake that makes sense.
--
Michael