Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1784552.1715788252@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix
Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes: > On 14.05.24 01:11, Tom Lane wrote: >> The mechanism that Andres describes for sourcing the name seems a bit >> overcomplex though. Why not just allow/require each extension to >> specify its name as a constant string? We could force the matter by >> redefining PG_MODULE_MAGIC as taking an argument: >> PG_MODULE_MAGIC("hstore"); > We kind of already have something like this, for NLS. If you look for > pg_bindtextdomain(TEXTDOMAIN) and ereport_domain(), this information > already trickles into the vicinity of the error data. Maybe the same > thing could just be used for this, by wiring up the macros a bit > differently. Hmm, cute idea, but it'd only help for extensions that are NLS-enabled. Which I bet is a tiny fraction of the population. So far as I can find, we don't even document how to set up TEXTDOMAIN for an extension --- you have to cargo-cult the macro definition from some in-core extension. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: