Re: Improvement in log message of logical replication worker

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 12:36:46PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Peter Eisentraut
> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 5/12/17 00:30, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >> I got same log messages 'starting logical replication worker for
> >> subscription' total 5 times but actually 4 of them mean to launch
> >> table sync worker and another one means apply worker. We cannot
> >> distinguish them. Also, I got same log messages 'logical replication
> >> synchronization worker finished processing' total 4 times but I think
> >> it's better to show the table name in finish log message as well. Any
> >> thoughts?
> >
> > Yeah, that's quite a lot of messages for normal operation. I've been
> > playing around with it a little bit and came up with the attached patch
> > that produced a slightly reduced log volume and more consistent messages.
> >
> > I think we don't need a message from the launcher that it will launch a
> > worker and then the worker also reporting that it started, so I
> > downgraded the former to DEBUG1.
>
> Agreed. Autovacuum launcher also doesn't emit such log message.
>
> > A more radical solution would be to
> > downgrade all these messages to DEBUG1.
> >
> > We want to avoid showing OIDs in user-facing messages, but it's not
> > always easy to look up the names. See the patch for one solution.
> >
>
> The patch looks good to me.
> There are some log messages saying just 'logical replication worker
> for subscription ...' in reread_subscription but should we add 'apply'
> to these messages in order for user to distinguish between apply
> worker and table sync worker?

[Action required within three days. This is a generic notification.]

The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item. Peter,
since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
v10 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please observe the policy on
open item ownership[1] and send a status update within three calendar days of
this message. Include a date for your subsequent status update. Testers may
discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
well in advance of shipping v10. Consequently, I will appreciate your efforts
toward speedy resolution. Thanks.

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com