Re: backtrace_on_internal_error

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: backtrace_on_internal_error
Дата
Msg-id CA+Tgmobgc1T2n0DDcqA4vwQf77UC=PxUkXLPouRXOcYkREhnJA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: backtrace_on_internal_error  (Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 1:47 PM Matthias van de Meent
<boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't speak for Nathan, but my reason would be that I'm not in the
> habit to attach a debugger to my program to keep track of state
> progression, but instead use elog() during patch development. I'm not
> super stoked for getting my developmental elog(LOG)-s spammed with
> stack traces, so I'd want to set this at least to ERROR, while in
> production LOG could be fine.
>
> Similarly, there are probably extensions that do not use ereport()
> directly, but instead use elog(), because of reasons like 'not
> planning on doing translations' and 'elog() is the easier API'.
> Forcing a change over to ereport because of stack trace spam in logs
> caused by elog would be quite annoying.

That does seem like a fair complaint. But I also think it would be
really good if we had something that could be enabled unconditionally
instead of via a GUC... because if it's gated by aa GUC then it often
won't be there when you need it.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Jeff Davis
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: CREATE FUNCTION ... SEARCH { DEFAULT | SYSTEM | SESSION }
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Possible segfault when sending notification within a ProcessUtility hook