Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Craig Ringer <craig.ringer@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>,
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-01-21T01:56:49Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Craig Ringer <craig.ringer@enterprisedb.com> writes: > On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 05:23, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> BTW, it also looks like the patch is doing nothing to prevent the >> backtrace from being sent to the connected client. > I don't see a good reason to send a bt to a client. Even though these > backtraces won't be analysing debuginfo and populating args, locals, etc, > it should still just go to the server log. Yeah. That's easier than I was thinking, we just need to s/LOG/LOG_SERVER_ONLY/. >> Maybe, given all of these things, we should forget using elog at >> all and just emit the trace with fprintf(stderr). > That causes quite a lot of pain with MemoryContextStats() already True. Given the changes discussed in the last couple messages, I don't see any really killer reasons why we can't ship the trace through elog. We can always try that first, and back off to fprintf if we do find reasons why it's too unstable. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Perform apply of large transactions by parallel workers.
- 216a784829c2 16.0 cited
-
Enhance pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() for auxiliary processes.
- 790fbda90209 15.0 cited
-
Allow GRANT on pg_log_backend_memory_contexts().
- f0b051e322d5 15.0 cited
-
Move Perl test modules to a better namespace
- b3b4d8e68ae8 15.0 cited
-
Unify PostgresNode's new() and get_new_node() methods
- 201a76183e20 15.0 cited
-
Add backtrace support for error reporting
- 71a8a4f6e365 13.0 cited