Re: Improve OAuth discovery logging

From: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Improve OAuth discovery logging
Date: 2026-03-17 15:38:01
Message-ID: CAOYmi+k31AMJr-e_TAJbMk3P8mm5gtfa1+LFJfc-g=-KibrCrg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 11:19 PM Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Do you mean that we do the same as WARNING_CLIENT_ONLY in this patch, and use a separate patch to fix them together?

I'm not sure I want to fix it at all; it keeps the code coherent even
if someone later decides they really want to override the CLIENT_ONLY
directive for some reason.

On the WARNING_CLIENT_ONLY thread [1], Andres said

> I don't think it needs to be done right now, but I again want to suggest
> it'd be nice if we split log levels into a bitmask. If we bits, separate
> from the log level, for do-not-log-to-client and do-not-log-to-server
> some of this code would imo look nicer.

and I think I agree that would be a good way for future improvement.

--Jacob

[1] https://postgr.es/m/20201228191428.p5bhcvd4ixsuyifd%40alap3.anarazel.de

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2026-03-17 15:51:15 Re: Skipping schema changes in publication
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2026-03-17 15:34:26 Re: [PATCH] Docs: clarify default values of EXPLAIN BUFFERS and SERIALIZE