Re: PATCH: backtraces for error messages

On 22 June 2018 at 08:48, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

> On 2018-06-22 08:24:45 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> > On Thu., 21 Jun. 2018, 19:26 Pavan Deolasee, <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:02 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 12:35:10PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> > >> > I wrote it because I got sick of Assert(false) debugging, and I was
> > >> chasing
> > >> > down some "ERROR: 08P01: insufficient data left in message" errors.
> > >> Then I
> > >> > got kind of caught up in it... you know how it is.
> > >>
> > >> Yes, I know that feeling! I have been using as well the Assert(false)
> > >> and the upgrade-to-PANIC tricks a couple of times, so being able to
> get
> > >> more easily backtraces would be really nice.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Sometime back I'd suggested an idea to be able to dynamically manage
> log
> > > levels for elog messages [1].
> > >
> >
> >
> > Huge +1 from me on being able to selectively manage logging on a
> > module/subsystem, file, or line level.
> >
> > I don't think I saw the post.
> >
> > Such a thing would obviously make built in backtrace support much more
> > useful.
>
> I strongly suggest keeping these as separate as possible. Either is
> useful without the other, and both are nontrivial. Tackling them
> together imo makes it much more likely to get nowhere.
>
>
Totally agree, and it's why I raised this as its own thing.

Thanks.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services