From: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Sergey Dudoladov <sergey(dot)dudoladov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Introduce "log_connection_stages" setting. |
Date: | 2025-03-03 23:43:10 |
Message-ID: | CAAKRu_Yj6GSEFvjfmVKC-RS_x5-cA_ZFwe=FCEnhwyyCJwEg1g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 9:40 AM Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I'd certainly like to merge it in 18. The patch itself needs more
> work, which I'm planning on doing this week. I think we have a
> reasonable amount of consensus on using GUC_LIST_INPUT.
>
> I am less sure about merging log_disconnections into log_connections.
> I think it makes sense in principle. But, in 18, when people satisfied
> with existing behavior change log_connections from 'on' to 'all' to
> comply with the new format, they will get the disconnections messages.
>
> I am still somewhat nervous about merging the patch in general and
> people being surprised because they didn't pay attention to the
> discussion and now log_connections is different and they would have
> -1'd if they'd been paying attention.
Okay, I got cold feet today working on this. I actually think we
probably want some kind of guc set (set like union/intersection/etc
not set like assign a value) infrastructure for gucs that can be equal
to any combination of predetermined values. See my musings on this
here [1].
It is too late in the cycle for me to get something like that done,
but I am interested in working on it next release. IIRC you did not
deprecate log_connections in your patch, but adding another guc that
is a staged version of it seems not as good as turning log_connections
into a more modular GUC. But I just don't think we want to move
log_connections/disconnections toward a string/list.
- Melanie
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2025-03-03 23:46:24 | Re: Update docs for UUID data type |
Previous Message | Melanie Plageman | 2025-03-03 23:24:59 | Re: Log connection establishment timings |