From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_rewind: Fix some problems when copying files >2GB. |
Date: | 2017-08-29 02:22:12 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSSq2_e4DjyR4sKgOoNGxewueF82np4EPHG8cF1tt4yLw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I am fine with however you want to handle it, but it seems odd to me
>>> that we don't have a way of embedding INT64_FORMAT in a translatable
>>> string. Surely that's going to be a problem in some case, sometime,
>>> isn't it?
>>
>> The way we do that elsewhere is to print out the value to a string
>> variable and then use %s in the translatable message.
>
> Hmm. OK. That doesn't sound great, but if there's no better option...
I don't like breaking the abstraction of pg_log() with the existing
flags with some kind of pg_debug() layer. The set of APIs present now
in pg_rewind for logging is nice to have, and I think that those debug
messages should be translated. So what about the attached?
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
rewind-int64-log.patch | application/octet-stream | 998 bytes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-29 02:26:24 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_rewind: Fix some problems when copying files >2GB. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-28 21:30:47 | pgsql: Stamp 9.2.23. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-29 02:26:24 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_rewind: Fix some problems when copying files >2GB. |
Previous Message | yangjie | 2017-08-29 02:19:12 | Re: [POC] hash partitioning |