On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 9/4/17 06:03, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> I don't like breaking the abstraction of pg_log() with the existing
>>>> flags with some kind of pg_debug() layer. The set of APIs present now
>>>> in pg_rewind for logging is nice to have, and I think that those debug
>>>> messages should be translated. So what about the attached?
>>>
>>> Your point about INT64_FORMAT not necessarily working with fprintf
>>> is an outstanding reason not to keep it like it is. I've not reviewed
>>> this patch in detail but I think this is basically the way to fix it.
>>
>> Actually this code goes throgh vsnprintf, not fprintf, which should be
>> safe, so I removed that part of the comment, and pushed.
>
> Is there a reason this was not backpatched to 9.5?
Indeed. Please note that cherry-picking the fix from 23c1f0a works just fine.
--
Michael