Re: backtrace_on_internal_error

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: backtrace_on_internal_error
Date: 2023-12-05 20:08:22
Message-ID: 956072.1701806902@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 at 19:30, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I think we should consider unconditionally emitting a backtrace when
>>> an elog() is hit, instead of requiring a GUC.

>> Perhaps this should be a GUC that defaults to LOG or ERROR.

> I can't speak for Nathan, but my reason would be that I'm not in the
> habit to attach a debugger to my program to keep track of state
> progression, but instead use elog() during patch development. I'm not
> super stoked for getting my developmental elog(LOG)-s spammed with
> stack traces, so I'd want to set this at least to ERROR, while in
> production LOG could be fine.

Yeah, I would not be happy either with elog(LOG) suddenly getting
10x more verbose. I think it might be okay to unconditionally do this
when elevel >= ERROR, though.

(At the same time, I don't have a problem with the idea of a GUC
controlling the minimum elevel to cause the report. Other people
might have other use-cases than I do.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2023-12-05 20:14:23 Re: Add checks in pg_rewind to abort if backup_label file is present
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2023-12-05 20:06:10 Re: backtrace_on_internal_error