On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 9:30 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: >> I wonder if we should actually just remove the second message? AFAICT no >> other tools log that information. Is there any particular reason why we want >> that logging in pg_receivewal when we don't have it in other tools? > > I maintain a fork of pg_receivewal lately that works as a service, and > I have found myself a fan of this log bit when debugging funky issues. > That's a personal opinion, no objections to remove it either.
The patch I sent upthread was actually doing that, which is obviously incorrect:
- if (time_to_abort)
+ if (verbose && time_to_abort)
{
fprintf(stderr, _("%s: received interrupt signal, exiting\n"),
progname);
While the version on my laptop does that:
if (time_to_abort)
{
- fprintf(stderr, _("%s: received interrupt signal, exiting\n"),
- progname);
+ if (verbose)
+ fprintf(stderr, _("%s: received interrupt
signal, exiting\n"),
+ progname);
return true;
}
return false;
Not sure how that feel into the cracks.
I slept on it, and let's do things the same way as the other tools do
without logs in this case. So this gives the patch attached.
--
Michael
receivewal-verbose-fix-v2.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
