Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lS9a1-00033Z-Fm for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2021 02:30:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lS9a0-0004iJ-EV for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2021 02:30:36 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lS9Zz-0004iC-Fp for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2021 02:30:36 +0000 Received: from [66.111.4.29] (helo=out5-smtp.messagingengine.com) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lS9Zx-0008A8-9n for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2021 02:30:34 +0000 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 021A35C00BA; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 22:30:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 01 Apr 2021 22:30:22 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:subject:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; bh=2FXiK5fDT0TXEqu/sC2swlLZ33czGA32oleDK3CY4d8=; b=HB5Xhbjm qXXC60ciQVCDhXSjgrGc1zSFdJFsKefEqsqZSONValPtsy5KEungirZgQOfPWiXM ZwiWrP8/iIS2NydmqwF4lF0nJilgJIhtRAcLNukqDztnR4racqh1eAmyHnjfCxi1 79kO9muJaRPeBqxoyOBJGltXDgzEYPs1sKmoSGymcTLH4IF265SLa/qlqSlBFpet DR7CHZQSpPYEouiF4X6l2o1PTnb0AbXB1Fs4wWWfk6bSnsoYYfpsY/VNdHe9Uoh7 YUwZQQ1GMRzH1qSjAf+ddkpXz4DKnVyAiM6iDVZh9kIE/oCFbjOv5SWWj+rnL8e8 37t+yvbVNCTlAA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudeihedgiedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucgoteeftdelqddtudculddvtddmnecujfgurhepff fhvffukfggtggugfgjfgesthekredttderudenucfhrhhomhepfddkrghlvhhhvghrrhgv segrlhhvhhdrnhhoqdhiphdrohhrghdkfdcuoegrlhhvhhgvrhhrvgesrghlvhhhrdhnoh dqihhprdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeehkeegiedvueffleehtdeuffetjeej tdetteeukeduvdegudeihfefffevffdtudenucfkphepudeltddrleehrdduledrleehne cuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheprghlvhhh vghrrhgvsegrlhhvhhdrnhhoqdhiphdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from perhan.alvh.no-ip.org (unknown [190.95.19.95]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E53C524005B; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 22:30:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by perhan.alvh.no-ip.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 231372A032E; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 23:30:10 -0300 (-03) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 23:30:10 -0300 From: "'alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org'" To: Tom Lane Cc: "iwata.aya@fujitsu.com" , "tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com" , 'Kyotaro Horiguchi' , "k.jamison@fujitsu.com" , "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" Subject: Re: libpq debug log Message-ID: <20210402023010.GA13563@alvherre.pgsql> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20210401190719.GA29711@alvherre.pgsql> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 66.111.4.29 (deferred) List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On 2021-Apr-01, 'alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org' wrote: > Ooh, wow ... now that is a silly bug! Thanks, I'll push the fix in a > minute. It still didn't fix it! Drongo is now reporting a difference in the expected trace -- and the differences all seem to be message lengths. Now that is pretty mysterious, because the messages themselves are printed identically. Perl's output is pretty unhelpful, but I wrote them to a file and diffed manually; it's attached. So for example when we expect ! # B 123 ErrorResponse S "ERROR" V "ERROR" C "42601" M "cannot insert multiple commands into a prepared statement" F "SSSS" L "SSSS" R "SSSS" \\x00 we actually get ! # B 173 ErrorResponse S "ERROR" V "ERROR" C "42601" M "cannot insert multiple commands into a prepared statement" F "SSSS" L "SSSS" R "SSSS" \\x00 [slaps forehead] I suppose the difference must be that the message length includes the redacted string fields. So the file in the F file is 50 chars longer, *kaboom*. (I'm actually very surprised that this didn't blow up earlier.) I'm not sure what to do about this. Maybe the message length for ErrorResponse/NoticeResponse ought to be redacted too. -- Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W