Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve postmaster's logging oflisten socket creation.
От | Stephen Frost |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve postmaster's logging oflisten socket creation. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20170314113701.GL9812@tamriel.snowman.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve postmaster's logging of listen socket creation. (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > > I don't mind the new output, but I kinda wonder whether it's a good idea > > to include the '.s.PGSQL.5432' bit in the host and/or whether we > > shouldn't include the port in the TCP cases as well > > Yeah, I've been thinking that maybe it should look like > > 2017-03-13 10:08:49.399 EDT [90059] LOG: listening on IPv6 address "::1", port 5432 > 2017-03-13 10:08:49.399 EDT [90059] LOG: listening on IPv4 address "127.0.0.1", port 5432 > 2017-03-13 10:08:49.400 EDT [90059] LOG: listening on Unix address "/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432" > > It would take a couple more lines of code to make that happen, but > it would future-proof the messages against the day we decide to > allow one server to respond to more than one port number ... I certainly agree with adding the port for TCP. I also agree with Andres' point about the unix socket, though I'm tempted to suggest that we should just teach libpq to understand a straight unix socket being passed for host/-h rather than change what the server reports here.. Thanks! Stephen
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: