From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(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 12:38:52 |
Message-ID: | CALj2ACW38GASo5yVKr2qNfwD0SpVi5p3AiCWYxd4SH96LUOrWA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 4:01 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>
> 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.
Removed.
> 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.
Agree. I think it's easy for one to guess the slot name follows "....
replication slot %s", so I removed the translator message.
> > 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.
I retained wrapping messages in errmsg("...").
> You can verify this by doing "make update-po" and then searching for the
> messages in postgres.pot.
Translation gives me [1] with v18 patch
PSA v18 patch.
[1]
#: replication/slot.c:545
#, c-format
msgid "acquired logical replication slot \"%s\""
msgstr ""
#: replication/slot.c:547
#, c-format
msgid "acquired physical replication slot \"%s\""
msgstr ""
#: replication/slot.c:622
#, c-format
msgid "released logical replication slot \"%s\""
msgstr ""
#: replication/slot.c:624
#, c-format
msgid "released physical replication slot \"%s\""
msgstr ""
--
Bharath Rupireddy
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v18-0001-Log-messages-for-replication-slot-acquisition-an.patch | application/octet-stream | 3.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2023-11-16 12:55:20 | RE: pg_upgrade and logical replication |
Previous Message | shveta malik | 2023-11-16 12:03:54 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |