Re: log_min_messages per backend type

From: "Euler Taveira" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>
To: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: japin <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, "Andres Freund" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, "Chao Li" <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: log_min_messages per backend type
Date: 2026-01-15 16:07:26
Message-ID: f20103f2-d960-4206-9969-c4a936524ab1@app.fastmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Dec 9, 2025, at 3:24 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2025-Dec-09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>> So here's your v6 again with those fixes as 0003 -- let's see what CI
>> thinks of this. I haven't looked at your doc changes yet.
>
> This passed CI, so I have marked it as Ready for Committer. Further
> comments are still welcome, of course, but if there are none, I intend
> to get it committed in a few days.
>

I took another look after Chao Li comments [1]. I created the 0003 patch
that does the sort as suggested. I think it is good to be consistent but
I'm fine if we decided the additional code is not worth. The 32 in the
MAX_LMM_STR_LEN is arbitrary but it is based on the size of the largest
element in the list ("dead-end client backend:warning"). I didn't take
into account the comma and space between elements but it is not
necessary since other elements are smaller than the largest one.
I didn't implement the 2nd suggestion.

I also merged Alvaro's fix to 0002. The v8 is attached.

I didn't change the commit message but if 0003 is merged into 0001 then
it should mention that

8<--------------------------------------------------------------------8<
The SHOW command presents well-formatted list sorted by process type and
the generic log level is the first element list. It improves readability
and has a clear indentation.
8<--------------------------------------------------------------------8<

Do we really need a different backend type in this case? For background
workers the description is "background worker". Shoundn't it use the
same description for this edge case too?

- backend_type_str = MyBgworkerEntry->bgw_type;
+ {
+ if (MyBgworkerEntry && MyBgworkerEntry->bgw_type[0] != '\0')
+ backend_type_str = MyBgworkerEntry->bgw_type;
+ else
+ backend_type_str = "early bgworker";
+ }

I also noticed that commit 18d67a8d7d30 forgot to add gettext_noop to
the get_backend_type_for_log function. It should be consistent with
GetBackendTypeDesc() return.

[1] https://postgr.es/m/1130A10B-E7AE-49F3-9E13-2CD69B3F9DFD@gmail.com

--
Euler Taveira
EDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/

Attachment Content-Type Size
v8-0001-log_min_messages-per-process-type.patch text/x-patch 26.3 KB
v8-0002-Assign-backend-type-earlier.patch text/x-patch 8.6 KB
v8-0003-fixup-log_min_messages-per-process-type.patch text/x-patch 3.5 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2026-01-15 16:08:16 Re: refactor architecture-specific popcount code
Previous Message Jacob Champion 2026-01-15 16:06:53 Re: Row pattern recognition