Re: backend type in log_line_prefix?
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: backend type in log_line_prefix? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | c14e8db8-3c31-1463-dd49-cbf45643d8e7@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: backend type in log_line_prefix? (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: backend type in log_line_prefix?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-03-11 19:53, Justin Pryzby wrote: > Can I suggest: > > $ git diff > diff --git a/src/backend/utils/error/elog.c b/src/backend/utils/error/elog.c > index 3a6f7f9456..56e0a1437e 100644 > --- a/src/backend/utils/error/elog.c > +++ b/src/backend/utils/error/elog.c > @@ -2945,7 +2945,7 @@ write_csvlog(ErrorData *edata) > if (MyProcPid == PostmasterPid) > appendCSVLiteral(&buf, "postmaster"); > else if (MyBackendType == B_BG_WORKER) > - appendCSVLiteral(&buf, MyBgworkerEntry->bgw_type); > + appendCSVLiteral(&buf, MyBgworkerEntry->bgw_name); > else > appendCSVLiteral(&buf, pgstat_get_backend_desc(MyBackendType)); The difference is intentional. bgw_type is so that you can filter and group by type. The bgw_name could be totally different for each instance. Having the bgw name available somehow would perhaps also be useful, but then we should also do this in a consistent way for processes that are not background workers, such as regular client backends or wal senders or autovacuum workers. Doing it just for background workers would create inconsistencies that the introduction of bgw_type some time ago sought to eliminate. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: