On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 7:31 PM, Ashesh Vashi <ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com
> wrote:

> [Adding pgadmin-hackers list...]
>
> Hi Team,
>
> Using the mutex around the logging code too to avoid overlapping log
> message.
> Please review it, and let me know your concern.
>
> Implementation details:
> - Moved 'MutexLogger' class, which was used by the connection management
> code only, in the include/misc.h
> -  Use a static mutex for the non-windows system, and used 'MutexLogger'
> instance for the better lock/unlock mechanism in the LogMessage(...)
> function.
>
Hi Team,

Please review this patch.

-- Thanks, Ashesh

>
> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 2:27 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Thomas Krennwallner <
>>> tk+pg...@postsubmeta.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I've just found this suspicious log messages (I've added line numbers in
>>>> the attachment pgagent.log):
>>>>
>>>>  8  Tue May 8 11:11:23 2018 DEBUG: Creating DB connection:
>>>> service=xiserver56_tisdbadm cTue May o8nne ct_timeout11:=151: 23 201
>>>> 8applica DEBtUion_nameG: S=pglaeegpeinngt.@.d.e
>>>>  9  v_tisdevel dbname=dev_tisdevel
>>>>
>>>> Note how line 8 and 9 are actually two log messages, which should
>>>> have been printed in two lines:
>>>>
>>>> Tue May 8 11:11:23 2018 DEBUG: Creating DB connection:
>>>> service=xiserver56_tisdbadm connect_timeout=5
>>>> application_name=pgagent@dev_tisdevel dbname=dev_tisdevel
>>>> Tue May 8 11:11:23 2018 DEBUG: Sleeping...
>>>>
>>>> It appears that two threads are writing to stdout at the same time,
>>>> which calls for an exclusive lock in function
>>>> void LogMessage(const std::wstring &msg, const int &level)
>>>>
>>> Dave,
>>>
>>> Shall we use a mutex here too?
>>>
>>>
>> I would think so, yes.
>>
>> --
>> Dave Page
>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
>> Twitter: @pgsnake
>>
>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>
>
>

Reply via email to