Re: elog() proposal

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Bruce Momjian
Тема Re: elog() proposal
Дата
Msg-id 200202231936.g1NJauo29240@candle.pha.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: elog() proposal  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > So, basically, what this comes down to with respect to your patch:
> 
> > 1. Renumbering the error codes breaks backward compatibility *silently*.
> 
> Perhaps, but it doesn't bother me.  We have *never* promised binary
> compatibility of server-side extensions across versions; usually,
> you should be happy if a recompile is sufficient ;-).  (Structs,
> for example, are subject to field rearrangement all the time.)

I didn't think we had binary backward compatibility for server
functions.  The switch statement to test *_min_messages levels is going
to look pretty bad, compared to a simple greater-than test for level
values.

One intestesting trick would be to start numbering the elog messages
levels at 10, and throw an error if any messages comes in with a value
less than that.  That would properly warn people of old object files and
may be the best bet.

> In any case, we could maintain binary compatibility for the old-style
> codes (DEBUG, ERROR, etc); this does not force us to use matching
> codes for the new PG_ERROR etc. levels.

Yes, I think keeping the old symbols in for one release is a good idea. 
Again, this would be done only just before beta, during pgindent run,
where there are no outstanding patches.


> > 2. CRASH doesn't seem like a good name to me.
> 
> Why not?  It's short, memorable, accurate, and what's wrong with
> a little levity?
> 
> > 3. I agree with adding a LOG or INFO level between DEBUG and NOTICE.
> 
> Both, I think; they're not the same thing.  LOG = routine server
> operation notices (eg, "checkpoint starting now").  INFO =
> allegedly-helpful messages issued to client (eg, the one about
> truncating overlength identifiers).  Normal configuration would
> be to put one but not the other into the postmaster log.

Sorry, truncating overly long identifiers is a NOTICE, not INFO. I
reserved info for only places where the information did not indicate any
kind of unusual situation, like SERIAL sequence creation.  You can go
through the existing NOTICE's after I apply and salt to taste.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: elog() proposal
Следующее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Patches split from 7.3 queue