From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: add log messages when replication slots become active and inactive (was Re: Is it worth adding ReplicationSlot active_pid to ReplicationSlotPersistentData?) |
Date: | 2023-11-16 10:31:43 |
Message-ID: | 202311161031.jwsue36p4xvw@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2023-Nov-16, Peter Smith wrote:
> I searched HEAD code and did not find any "translator:" comments for
> just ordinary slot name substitutions like these; AFAICT that comment
> is not necessary anymore.
True. Lose that.
The rationale I have is to consider whether a translator looking at the
original message message in isolation is going to understand what the %s
means. If it's possible to tell what it is without having to go read
the source code that leads to the message, then you don't need a
"translator:" comment. Otherwise you do.
You also need to assume the translator is not stupid, but that seems an
OK assumption.
> SUGGESTION (#1a and #1b)
>
> ereport(log_replication_commands ? LOG : DEBUG1,
> errmsg(SlotIsLogical(s)
> ? "acquired logical replication slot \"%s\""
> : "acquired physical replication slot \"%s\"",
> NameStr(s->data.name)));
The bad thing about this is that gettext() is not going to pick up these
strings into the translation catalog. You could fix that by adding
gettext_noop() calls around them:
ereport(log_replication_commands ? LOG : DEBUG1,
errmsg(SlotIsLogical(s)
? gettext_noop("acquired logical replication slot \"%s\"")
: gettext_noop("acquired physical replication slot \"%s\""),
NameStr(s->data.name)));
but at that point it's not clear that it's really better than putting
the ternary in the outer scope.
You can verify this by doing "make update-po" and then searching for the
messages in postgres.pot.
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Cada quien es cada cual y baja las escaleras como quiere" (JMSerrat)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2023-11-16 10:53:25 | Re: partitioning and identity column |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2023-11-16 10:21:49 | Re: WaitEventSet resource leakage |