On 2023-Mar-23, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 at 23:30, Bharath Rupireddy
> <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > + ereport(log_replication_commands ? LOG : DEBUG3,
> > > + (errmsg("acquired physical replication slot \"%s\"",
> > > + slotname)));
>
> So this is just a bit of bike-shedding but I don't feel like these log
> messages really meet the standard we set for our logging. Like what
> did the acquiring? What does "acquired" actually mean for a
> replication slot? Is there not any meta information about the
> acquisition that can give more context to the reader to make this
> message more meaningful?
>
> I would expect a log message like this to say, I dunno, something like
> "physical replication slot \"%s\" acquired by streaming TCP connection
> to 192.168.0.1:999 at LSN ... with xxxMB of logs to read"
Hmm, I don't disagree with your argument in principle, but I think this
proposal is going too far. I think stating the PID is more than
sufficient. And I don't think we need this patch to go great lengths to
explain what acquisition is, either; I mean, maybe that's a good thing
to have, but then that's a different patch.
> I even would be wondering if the other end shouldn't also be logging a
> corresponding log and we shouldn't be going out of our way to ensure
> there's enough information to match them up and presenting them in a
> way that makes that easy.
Hmm, you should be able to match things using the connection
information. I don't think the slot acquisition operation in itself is
that important.
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without"
