Re: Unified logging system for command-line programs
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-01-03T18:54:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 03/01/2019 19:03, Andres Freund wrote: >> My goal was to make logging smaller and more >> compact. Two, I think tying error reporting to flow control does not >> always work well and leads to bad code and a bad user experience. > > Not sure I can buy that, given that we seem to be doing quite OK in the backend. Consider the numerous places where we do elog(LOG) for an *error* because we don't want to jump away. >> Relatedly, rewriting all the frontend programs to exception style would >> end up being a 10x project to rewrite everything for no particular >> benefit. Going from 8 or so APIs to 2 is already an improvement, I >> think. If someone wants to try going further, it can be considered, but >> it would be an entirely different project. > > Why would it be 10x the effort, Because you would have to rewrite all the programs to handle elog(ERROR) jumping somewhere else. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Commits
-
Unified logging system for command-line programs
- cc8d41511721 12.0 landed
-
Assorted translatable string fixes
- 55a70a023c3d 10.0 cited