Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cmCOr-0006qA-VV for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 04:43:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cmCOr-0002TK-CF for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 04:43:33 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cmCOp-0002PU-Td for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 04:43:31 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cmCOl-00049e-Gb for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 04:43:29 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v2A4hNUh019480; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 23:43:23 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Robert Haas cc: Joe Conway , "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Upgrading postmaster's log messages about bind/listen errors In-reply-to: References: <9564.1489091245@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas message dated "Thu, 09 Mar 2017 22:24:45 -0500" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <19478.1489121003.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 23:43:23 -0500 Message-ID: <19479.1489121003@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Joe Conway wrote: >> On 03/09/2017 12:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> For good measure I also added a DEBUG1 log message reporting successful >>> binding to a port. I'm not sure if there's an argument for putting this >>> out at LOG level (i.e. by default) --- any thoughts about that? >> +1 for making it LOG instead of DEBUG1 > I would tend to vote against that, because startup is getting > gradually chattier and chattier, and I think this isn't likely to be > of interest to very many people most of the time. Yeah, my thought was that if we've gotten along without this for 20 years, it's probably not of interest to most people most of the time. However, if we're measuring this on a scale of usefulness to the average DBA, I would argue that it's of more interest than any of these messages that currently appear by default: 2017-03-09 23:40:12.334 EST [19335] LOG: MultiXact member wraparound prote= ctions are now enabled 2017-03-09 23:40:12.335 EST [19339] LOG: autovacuum launcher started 2017-03-09 23:40:12.336 EST [19341] LOG: logical replication launcher star= ted The first of those is surely past its sell-by date. As for the other two, we should log *failure* to start, but not the normal case. regards, tom lane --=20 Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers