Обсуждение: not translating backend types for ps and log_line_prefix

Hello,

Pursuant to my comments in [1], I attach a patch that restricts the use
of translated process types as indicated in $SUBJECT.  This adds a
separate column to the process type list, mostly extracted from Euler's
patch, not marked for translation, and uses it in a couple of places.
I think this is more reasonable.  I chose to CC Heikki here because the
business with translating these strings was, as I recall, his doing ...

[1] https://postgr.es/m/202512091806.bsugq2l4wz7f@alvherre.pgsql


-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"No tengo por qué estar de acuerdo con lo que pienso"
                             (Carlos Caszeli)

On 10/12/2025 15:45, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Pursuant to my comments in [1], I attach a patch that restricts the use
> of translated process types as indicated in $SUBJECT.  This adds a
> separate column to the process type list, mostly extracted from Euler's
> patch, not marked for translation, and uses it in a couple of places.
> I think this is more reasonable.  I chose to CC Heikki here because the
> business with translating these strings was, as I recall, his doing ...
> 
> [1] https://postgr.es/m/202512091806.bsugq2l4wz7f@alvherre.pgsql

Hm, I don't think I've changed how they're translated. At least not 
intentionally.

> +PG_PROCTYPE(B_AUTOVAC_LAUNCHER, "autovacuum", gettext_noop("autovacuum launcher"), AutoVacLauncherMain, true)
> +PG_PROCTYPE(B_AUTOVAC_WORKER, "autovacuum", gettext_noop("autovacuum worker"), AutoVacWorkerMain, true)

It seems not nice that both have the same name, "autovacuum". Similarly, 
I think it's good to have different names for dead-end backends and 
regular backends.

No objections to the general idea, although I think the current 
descriptions are fairly short already.

- Heikki

On 2025-Dec-10, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:

> On 10/12/2025 15:45, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Pursuant to my comments in [1], I attach a patch that restricts the use
> > of translated process types as indicated in $SUBJECT.  This adds a
> > separate column to the process type list, mostly extracted from Euler's
> > patch, not marked for translation, and uses it in a couple of places.
> > I think this is more reasonable.  I chose to CC Heikki here because the
> > business with translating these strings was, as I recall, his doing ...
> > 
> > [1] https://postgr.es/m/202512091806.bsugq2l4wz7f@alvherre.pgsql
> 
> Hm, I don't think I've changed how they're translated. At least not
> intentionally.

Hmm, maybe I misunderstood how the code was changing in these patches,
but I was thinking of
https://postgr.es/m/8e710eaa-fcfe-4a0b-ae90-87743083e777@iki.fi

Anyway, I think it's rather strange that %b in log_min_message expands
to these long strings which is why I propose to change it to shorter
ones.

> > +PG_PROCTYPE(B_AUTOVAC_LAUNCHER, "autovacuum", gettext_noop("autovacuum launcher"), AutoVacLauncherMain, true)
> > +PG_PROCTYPE(B_AUTOVAC_WORKER, "autovacuum", gettext_noop("autovacuum worker"), AutoVacWorkerMain, true)
> 
> It seems not nice that both have the same name, "autovacuum". Similarly, I
> think it's good to have different names for dead-end backends and regular
> backends.

True, I was not sure about this either.  For context, Euler's patch[2] was
adding a new column called "category" for use with his new
representation of log_min_messages, and he decided that something like
"autovacuum:DEBUG" should affect both the worker and the launcher.  I'm
not sure myself that this is a good idea, because if you want DEBUG for
just one and not the other, the proposed interface doesn't let you do
that.

[2] https://postgr.es/m/144f0f96-c6d3-4ad6-a236-00200513e2e0@app.fastmail.com

I'd be okay with instead adding "avlauncher", "avworker", "dead-end",
"standalone", to differentiate all those types.  ("av" sounds perhaps
too mysterious, so maybe "autovaclauncher" and "autovacworker" for
those?) Bikeshedding, again, welcome.  


> No objections to the general idea, although I think the current
> descriptions are fairly short already.

True, but names with spaces would be unhelpful for log_min_messages.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Siempre hay que alimentar a los dioses, aunque la tierra esté seca" (Orual)

On Wed, Dec 10, 2025, at 6:41 PM, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2025-Dec-10, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>> > +PG_PROCTYPE(B_AUTOVAC_LAUNCHER, "autovacuum", gettext_noop("autovacuum launcher"), AutoVacLauncherMain, true)
>> > +PG_PROCTYPE(B_AUTOVAC_WORKER, "autovacuum", gettext_noop("autovacuum worker"), AutoVacWorkerMain, true)
>>
>> It seems not nice that both have the same name, "autovacuum". Similarly, I
>> think it's good to have different names for dead-end backends and regular
>> backends.
>
> True, I was not sure about this either.  For context, Euler's patch[2] was
> adding a new column called "category" for use with his new
> representation of log_min_messages, and he decided that something like
> "autovacuum:DEBUG" should affect both the worker and the launcher.  I'm
> not sure myself that this is a good idea, because if you want DEBUG for
> just one and not the other, the proposed interface doesn't let you do
> that.
>

It is called "category" to group process types. The main motivation is
"backend" that has multiple entries. For "autovacuum", I checked the code and
launcher has just a few messages so I decided to have just one category. That's
certainly not a strong argument.

> [2] https://postgr.es/m/144f0f96-c6d3-4ad6-a236-00200513e2e0@app.fastmail.com
>
> I'd be okay with instead adding "avlauncher", "avworker", "dead-end",
> "standalone", to differentiate all those types.  ("av" sounds perhaps
> too mysterious, so maybe "autovaclauncher" and "autovacworker" for
> those?) Bikeshedding, again, welcome.
>

I'm fine expanding the list. If we carefully choose the names we can certainly
expand it later. For example, the standalone can be a new category in the
future. The same can be applied to autovacuum ("autovacuum" controls the worker
and a new category "autovacumlauncher" controls launcher messages).


--
Euler Taveira
EDB   https://www.enterprisedb.com/