On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> wrote:
> On 03/09/2017 12:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Over in
>> we spent quite a lot of effort to diagnose what turned out to be a simple
>> networking misconfiguration. It would probably have taken a lot less
>> effort if the postmaster were more forthcoming about exactly what address
>> it's trying to bind to. I seem to recall having wanted to include that
>> info in the messages many years ago, but at the time we lacked any
>> reasonably-portable way to decode a struct addrinfo. Now we have
>> pg_getnameinfo_all(), so PFA a patch to include the specific address in
>> any complaint about failures in the socket/bind/listen sequence.
>> For good measure I also added a DEBUG1 log message reporting successful
>> binding to a port. I'm not sure if there's an argument for putting this
>> out at LOG level (i.e. by default) --- any thoughts about that?
> +1 for making it LOG instead of DEBUG1
I would tend to vote against that, because startup is getting
gradually chattier and chattier, and I think this isn't likely to be
of interest to very many people most of the time.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com)
To make changes to your subscription: