Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes
От | vignesh C |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALDaNm0rPUq0-FZXmTV6gFmQO7huwrJXxz1y4ag2za7NA0jr5Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes
Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 1:54 PM Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:45 AM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 11:07 AM Bharath Rupireddy > > <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 12:00 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Thanks for the comments, attached v17 patch has the fix for the same. > > > > > > Have a minor comment on v17: > > > > > > can we modify the elog(LOG, to new style ereport(LOG, ? > > > + elog(LOG_SERVER_ONLY, "current backtrace:%s", errtrace.data); > > > > > > /*---------- > > > * New-style error reporting API: to be used in this way: > > > * ereport(ERROR, > > > * errcode(ERRCODE_UNDEFINED_CURSOR), > > > * errmsg("portal \"%s\" not found", stmt->portalname), > > > * ... other errxxx() fields as needed ...); > > > * > > > > Attached v18 patch has the changes for the same. > > Thanks. The v18 patch LGTM. I'm not sure if the CF bot failure is > related to the patch - https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5633364051886080 I felt this test failure is not related to this change. Let's wait and see the results of the next run. Also I noticed that this test seems to have failed many times in the buildfarm too recently: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_failures.pl?max_days=60&branch=HEAD&member=&stage=recoveryCheck&filter=Submit Regards, Vignesh
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: