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 | 872748.1715641913@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix
Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2024-05-13 19:25:11 -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
>> Hmmm, depending on the extension it can extensively call/use postgres code
>> so would be nice if we can differentiate if the code is called from
>> Postgres itself or from an extension.
> I think that's not realistically possible. It's also very fuzzy what that'd
> mean. If there's a planner hook and then the query executes normally, what do
> you report for an execution time error? And even the simpler case - should use
> of pg_stat_statements cause everything within to be logged as a
> pg_stat_statement message?
Not to mention that there could be more than one extension on the call
stack. I think tying this statically to the ereport call site is
fine.
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");
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: