Re: [HACKERS] Improvement in log message of logical replicationworker - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Improvement in log message of logical replicationworker
Date
Msg-id 20170520045804.hd6rnupexvabbnq2@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Improvement in log message of logical replicationworker  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Improvement in log message of logical replicationworker
List pgsql-hackers
Umm, just skimming here -- this patch shows some LOG messages using
elog() rather than ereport(), which seems bogus to me.

Also:"logical replication table synchronization worker for subscription \"%s\", table \"%s\" has started"
surely there is a more convenient name than "logical replication table
synchronization worker" for this process?  I think just getting rid of
the words "logical replication" there would be sufficient, since we
don't have the concept of "table synchronization worker" in any other
context.

More generally, the overall wording of this message seems a bit off.
How about something along the lines of "starting synchronization for table \"%s\" in subscription \"%s\""
?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Improvement in log message of logical replication worker
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - using names as primary names of plpgsqlfunction parameters instead $ based names