| From: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Incomplete startup packet errors |
| Date: | 2019-02-28 15:13:36 |
| Message-ID: | 20190228151336.GB7550@msg.df7cb.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Re: Magnus Hagander 2016-04-13 <CABUevEzq8_nSq7fwe0-fbOAK8S2YNN-PkfsamfEvy2-d3dRUoA(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> > >>> It's fairly common to see a lot of "Incomplete startup packet" in the
> > >>> logfiles caused by monitoring or healthcheck connections.
> >
> > >> I've also seen it caused by port scanning.
> >
> > > Yes, definitely. Question there might be if that's actually a case when
> > we
> > > *want* that logging?
> >
> > I should think someone might. But I doubt we want to introduce another
> > GUC for this. Would it be okay to downgrade the message to DEBUG1 if
> > zero bytes were received?
> >
> >
> Yeah, that was my suggestion - I think that's a reasonable compromise. And
> yes, I agree that a separate GUC for it would be a huge overkill.
There have been numerous complaints about that log message, and the
usual reply is always something like what Pavel said recently:
"It is garbage. Usually it means nothing, but better to work live
without this garbage." [1]
Let's get rid of it.
Christoph
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-Demote-incomplete-startup-packet-to-DEBUG1.patch | text/x-diff | 1.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2019-02-28 15:22:13 | PostgreSQL Participates in GSoC 2019! |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-02-28 15:13:17 | Re: Prevent extension creation in temporary schemas |