RE: libpq debug log

From: "tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: 'Alvaro Herrera' <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, "iwata(dot)aya(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <iwata(dot)aya(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: 'Tom Lane' <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 'Kyotaro Horiguchi' <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: libpq debug log
Date: 2021-03-18 03:38:09
Message-ID: TYAPR01MB2990C8CBB0FB4B7AD73C055FFE699@TYAPR01MB2990.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
> In pqTraceOutputString(), you can use the return value from fprintf to
> move the cursor -- no need to count chars.

Yes, precisely, 2 bytes for the double quotes needs to be subtracted as follows:

len = fprintf(...);
*cursor += (len - 2);

> I still think that the message-type specific functions should print the
> message type, rather than having the string arrays.

I sort of think so to remove the big arrays. But to minimize duplicate code, I think the code structure will look like:

fprintf(timestamp, length);
switch (type)
{
case '?':
pqTraceOutput?(...);
break;
case '?':
/* No message content */
fprintf("message_type_name");
break;
}

void
pqTraceOutput?(...)
{
fprintf("message_type_name");
print message content;
}

The order of length and message type is reversed. The .sgml should also be changed accordingly. What do you think?

Iwata-san,
Why don't you submit v27 patch with the current arrays kept, and then v28 with the arrays removed soon after?

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
> It would help when the value is "255", which is confusing between -1
> (or 255) in byte or 255 in 2-byte word. Or when the value looks like
> broken. I'd suggest "b"yte for 1 byte, "s"hort for 2 bytes, "l"ong for
> 4 bytes ('l' is confusing with '1', but anyway it is not needed)..

I don't have a strong opinion on this. (I kind of think I want to see unprefixed numbers; readers will look at the protocol reference anyway.) I'd like to leave this up to Iwata-san and Alvaro-san.

Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa}

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2021-03-18 03:56:12 Re: PITR promote bug: Checkpointer writes to older timeline
Previous Message houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com 2021-03-18 03:34:34 RE: Parallel INSERT (INTO ... SELECT ...)