Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today?
Date: 2023-12-07 02:40:30
Message-ID: ZXEwnkIweSGDH3Or@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 11:32:19PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
> IIUC trace_recovery_messages was a debugging aid in the 9.0 era when the HS was
> introduced. I'm also wondering if anyone used it in the past years.

FWIW, I'd be +1 for getting rid of entirely, with its conditional
block in PerformWalRecovery(), as it does not bring any additional
value now that it is possible to achieve much more with pg_waldump
(pg_xlogdump before that) introduced a couple of years later in 9.3.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Euler Taveira 2023-12-07 02:42:06 Re: Emitting JSON to file using COPY TO
Previous Message Euler Taveira 2023-12-07 02:32:19 Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today?