On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:11 AM, Christoph Berg <m...@debian.org> wrote:
> Re: Michael Paquier 2016-02-10 <CAB7nPqS=wBbZzBcty1KyN- > 5y9bpxz+dejbfcctebf06ef2u...@mail.gmail.com> > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> > wrote: > > > Frequently when reading postgres logs to do some post mortem analysis > > > I'm left wondering what process emitted an error/log message. After the > > > fact it's often hard to know wether an error message was emitted by a > > > user backend or by something internal, say the checkpointer or > > > autovacuum. Logging all process starts is often impractical given the > > > log volume that causes. > > > > > > So I'm proposing adding an escape displaying the process title (say 'k' > > > for kind?). So %k would emit something like "autovacuum worker > process", > > > "wal sender process" etc. > > > > It would be nice to get something consistent between the ps output and > > this new prefix, say with for example a miscadmin.h parameter like > > MyProcName. > > > > > I'm thinking it might make sense to give normal connections "" as the > > > name, they're usually already discernible. > > > > Yeah, that sounds fine for me. What about background workers? I would > > think that they should use BackgroundWorker->bgw_name. > > (Rediscovering an old horse) > > Couldn't these processes just set %a = application_name? (This would > obviously need %q to be taught that %a is always valid.) > +1 from me on having non-session processes set application_name for logging purposes, I've long wanted that. I don't know why you would have to change %q though. I assume you would just stick %a in from of %q, if that is what you wanted to do. But I've never used %q myself. Cheers, Jeff
