Re: pg_system_identifier()

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_system_identifier()
Date: 2013-08-22 16:06:03
Message-ID: 14611.1377187563@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2013-08-22 08:45:38 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> However, given that the value is the same for all servers in a
>> replication set, are we sure we want to call it system_identifier? Is
>> there a better name?

> Given it's been named that and visible via pg_controldata for years I am
> against introducing confusion by renaming it.

I agree that if we have a function named pg_system_identifier(), it ought
to return the same value that pg_controldata prints under that name.
But that doesn't really answer any questions about how that value is
obtained. I think the question on the table right now is whether we like
the way that value behaves, in the context of a user-visible system ID.
In particular, do we want to think about changing things so that (1) a
slave has a different ID than the master, and/or (2) a slave's ID changes
on promotion to master. I don't know the answers to these things ---
but once we make it user visible it's going to be too late to change
its behavior, so now's the time to consider.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2013-08-22 16:18:39 Re: pg_system_identifier()
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2013-08-22 16:04:08 Re: ALTER SYSTEM SET command to change postgresql.conf parameters (RE: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review])