Greetings,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Jobin Augustine writes:
> > However, Checking whether the port is open is resulting in error log like:
> > 2019-11-25 14:03:44.414 IST [14475] LOG: invalid length of startup packet
> > Yes, This is different from "Incomplete startup packet" dis
Jobin Augustine writes:
> However, Checking whether the port is open is resulting in error log like:
> 2019-11-25 14:03:44.414 IST [14475] LOG: invalid length of startup packet
> Yes, This is different from "Incomplete startup packet" discussed here.
> Steps to reproduce:
> $ telnet localhost 54
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 1:26 AM Andrew Dunstan <
andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/6/19 12:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 5:35 PM Andrew Dunstan
> > wrote:
> >> OK, I think we have agreement on Tom's patch. Do we want to backpatch
> OK, no back-patching it is.
>
On 3/6/19 12:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 5:35 PM Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
>> OK, I think we have agreement on Tom's patch. Do we want to backpatch
>> it? It's a change in behaviour, but I find it hard to believe anyone
>> relies on the existence of these annoying messages,
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 5:35 PM Andrew Dunstan
wrote:
> OK, I think we have agreement on Tom's patch. Do we want to backpatch
> it? It's a change in behaviour, but I find it hard to believe anyone
> relies on the existence of these annoying messages, so my vote would be
> to backpatch it.
I don't
On 3/4/19 7:42 AM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Andrew Dunstan 2019-03-04
> <7cc6d2c1-bd87-9890-259d-36739c247...@2ndquadrant.com>
>> Looks good to me.
> +1.
>
OK, I think we have agreement on Tom's patch. Do we want to backpatch
it? It's a change in behaviour, but I find it hard to believe any
Re: Andrew Dunstan 2019-03-04
<7cc6d2c1-bd87-9890-259d-36739c247...@2ndquadrant.com>
> Looks good to me.
+1.
Christoph
On 3/3/19 3:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan writes:
>>> Patch proposed by Christoph Berg is here:
>>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190228151336.GB7550%40msg.df7cb.de
>> Meh. That doesn't silence only the zero-bytes case, and I'm also
>> rather afraid of the fact t
I wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
>> Patch proposed by Christoph Berg is here:
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190228151336.GB7550%40msg.df7cb.de
> Meh. That doesn't silence only the zero-bytes case, and I'm also
> rather afraid of the fact that it's changing COMMERROR to something
>
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 3/1/19 6:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> No patch referenced, but I assume you mean only for the
>> zero-bytes-received case, right? No objection if so.
> Patch proposed by Christoph Berg is here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190228151336.GB7550%40msg.df7cb.de
On 3/1/19 6:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
>> So I propose shortly to commit this patch unconditionally demoting the
>> message to DEBUG1.
> No patch referenced, but I assume you mean only for the
> zero-bytes-received case, right? No objection if so.
>
>
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> So I propose shortly to commit this patch unconditionally demoting the
> message to DEBUG1.
No patch referenced, but I assume you mean only for the
zero-bytes-received case, right? No objection if so.
regards, tom lane
On 2/28/19 10:13 AM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Magnus Hagander 2016-04-13
>
>> It's fairly common to see a lot of "Incomplete startup packet" in the
>> logfiles caused by monitoring or healthcheck connections.
> I've also seen it caused by port scanning.
Yes, definitely. Que
Re: Magnus Hagander 2016-04-13
> > >>> It's fairly common to see a lot of "Incomplete startup packet" in the
> > >>> logfiles caused by monitoring or healthcheck connections.
> >
> > >> I've also seen it caused by port scanning.
> >
> > > Yes, definitely. Question there might be if that's actuall
14 matches
Mail list logo
