pg.ddx.io pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedLog the location field before any backtrace
5+ messages / 4 participants
[nested] [flat]
Commits from this thread:
2020-07-10 8ff4d1277b ff61359ad7 Log the location field before any backtrace
* Log the location field before any backtrace
@ 2020-07-09 09:17 Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Peter Eisentraut @ 2020-07-09 09:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-hackers
In PG13, we added the ability to add backtraces to the log output.
After some practical experience with it, I think the order in which the
BACKTRACE and the LOCATION fields are printed is wrong. I propose we
put the LOCATION field before the BACKTRACE field, not after. This
makes more sense because the location is effectively at the lowest level
of the backtrace.
Patch attached.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Attachments:
0001-Log-the-location-field-before-any-backtrace.patch (text/plain, 1.4K) download
From aaf4a8146cf60a5959e50432359fd9972f410e1b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 11:00:34 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Log the location field before any backtrace
This order makes more sense because the location is effectively at the
lowest level of the backtrace.
---
src/backend/utils/error/elog.c | 14 +++++++-------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/error/elog.c b/src/backend/utils/error/elog.c
index e976201030..e4b717c79a 100644
--- a/src/backend/utils/error/elog.c
+++ b/src/backend/utils/error/elog.c
@@ -2938,13 +2938,6 @@ send_message_to_server_log(ErrorData *edata)
append_with_tabs(&buf, edata->context);
appendStringInfoChar(&buf, '\n');
}
- if (edata->backtrace)
- {
- log_line_prefix(&buf, edata);
- appendStringInfoString(&buf, _("BACKTRACE: "));
- append_with_tabs(&buf, edata->backtrace);
- appendStringInfoChar(&buf, '\n');
- }
if (Log_error_verbosity >= PGERROR_VERBOSE)
{
/* assume no newlines in funcname or filename... */
@@ -2962,6 +2955,13 @@ send_message_to_server_log(ErrorData *edata)
edata->filename, edata->lineno);
}
}
+ if (edata->backtrace)
+ {
+ log_line_prefix(&buf, edata);
+ appendStringInfoString(&buf, _("BACKTRACE: "));
+ append_with_tabs(&buf, edata->backtrace);
+ appendStringInfoChar(&buf, '\n');
+ }
}
/*
--
2.27.0
* Re: Log the location field before any backtrace
@ 2020-07-09 11:25 Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
parent: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Gustafsson @ 2020-07-09 11:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>; +Cc: pgsql-hackers
> On 9 Jul 2020, at 11:17, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> In PG13, we added the ability to add backtraces to the log output. After some practical experience with it, I think the order in which the BACKTRACE and the LOCATION fields are printed is wrong. I propose we put the LOCATION field before the BACKTRACE field, not after. This makes more sense because the location is effectively at the lowest level of the backtrace.
Makes sense, +1
cheers ./daniel
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Log the location field before any backtrace
@ 2020-07-09 16:31 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
parent: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2020-07-09 16:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>; +Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>; pgsql-hackers
On 2020-Jul-09, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 9 Jul 2020, at 11:17, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> >
> > In PG13, we added the ability to add backtraces to the log output. After some practical experience with it, I think the order in which the BACKTRACE and the LOCATION fields are printed is wrong. I propose we put the LOCATION field before the BACKTRACE field, not after. This makes more sense because the location is effectively at the lowest level of the backtrace.
>
> Makes sense, +1
Likewise
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Log the location field before any backtrace
@ 2020-07-10 02:04 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
parent: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Michael Paquier @ 2020-07-10 02:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>; +Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>; Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>; pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 12:31:38PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2020-Jul-09, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 9 Jul 2020, at 11:17, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> In PG13, we added the ability to add backtraces to the log
>>> output. After some practical experience with it, I think the
>>> order in which the BACKTRACE and the LOCATION fields are printed
>>> is wrong. I propose we put the LOCATION field before the
>>> BACKTRACE field, not after. This makes more sense because the
>>> location is effectively at the lowest level of the backtrace.
>>
>> Makes sense, +1
>
> Likewise
+1.
--
Michael
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 832B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Log the location field before any backtrace
@ 2020-07-10 06:36 Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
parent: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Peter Eisentraut @ 2020-07-10 06:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>; Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>; +Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>; pgsql-hackers
On 2020-07-10 04:04, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 12:31:38PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> On 2020-Jul-09, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 9 Jul 2020, at 11:17, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In PG13, we added the ability to add backtraces to the log
>>>> output. After some practical experience with it, I think the
>>>> order in which the BACKTRACE and the LOCATION fields are printed
>>>> is wrong. I propose we put the LOCATION field before the
>>>> BACKTRACE field, not after. This makes more sense because the
>>>> location is effectively at the lowest level of the backtrace.
>>>
>>> Makes sense, +1
>>
>> Likewise
>
> +1.
committed
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-07-10 06:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-07-09 09:17 Log the location field before any backtrace Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
2020-07-09 11:25 ` Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
2020-07-09 16:31 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
2020-07-10 02:04 ` Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
2020-07-10 06:36 ` Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox