Re: elog/ereport VS misleading backtrace_function function address

Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> While chasing some other bug I've learned that backtrace_functions
> might be misleading with top elog/ereport() address.

That was understood from the beginning: this type of backtrace is
inherently pretty imprecise, and I doubt there is much that can
be done to make it better. IIRC the fundamental problem is it only
looks at global symbols, so static functions inherently defeat it.
It was argued that this is better than nothing, which is true, but
you have to take the info with a mountain of salt.

I recall speculating about whether we could somehow invoke gdb
to get a more comprehensive and accurate backtrace, but I don't
really have a concrete idea how that could be made to work.

regards, tom lane