Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> ! (errmsg("statement: [protocol] <BIND> %s", portal_name)));
> --- 1452,1460 ----
> ! (errmsg("statement: <protocol> <BIND> %s [PREPARE: %s]",
> ! *portal_name ? portal_name : "<unnamed>",
> ! portal->sourceText ? portal->sourceText : "")));
This is getting less readable not more so; and you still haven't got the
prepared statement's name in there, let alone any place to put the
parameter values.
Perhaps we should give up on the idea that this can all fit on one log
line? Maybe
LOG: parse: <statement-name>
DETAIL: statement: <source-text>
LOG: bind: <portal-name> to <statement-name>
DETAIL: statement: <source-text>
parameter 1: <parameter value>
parameter 2: <parameter value>
...
LOG: execute: <portal-name>
DETAIL: statement: <source-text>
The $64 question here is whether we want to repeat the source-text
in all three messages (parse, bind, execute) or try to reduce the
verbosity.
regards, tom lane
