From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tels <nospam-pg-abuse(at)bloodgate(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Upgrading postmaster's log messages about bind/listen errors |
Date: | 2017-03-10 16:27:22 |
Message-ID: | 20170310162722.GG9812@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > database system is ready to accept connections on (1.2.3.4)
>
> That would be a problem from a couple of directions. First, it wouldn't
> be unusual for there to be half a dozen addresses to list, not just one.
> Even a default configuration would probably read like
>
> database system is ready to accept connections on (127.0.0.1, ::1, /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432)
Yeah, that's probably a bit much to have all on one line.
> which doesn't seem very appetizing to me. Second, it would be
> considerably messier to implement because the "ready to accept
> connections" message comes out physically distant from the
> StreamServerPort function, and we don't save the struct addrinfo list
> past the end of that function. So I think the logging setup I had in
> my patch is pretty much the only sane way to do it, and we just have
> to decide whether it's worth exposing at default log level or not.
I definitely think we should include it at the default log level. We
certainly wouldn't be the first daemon process to do so (bind9 comes to
mind, but I notice ntpd, nrpe, and strongswan do also, and probably some
others).
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?= | 2017-03-10 16:29:32 | Re: Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-03-10 16:21:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Small issue in online devel documentation build |