Re: [HACKERS] Incomplete startup packet errors - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Christoph Berg
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Incomplete startup packet errors
Date
Msg-id 20190228151336.GB7550@msg.df7cb.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Incomplete startup packet errors  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Re: Magnus Hagander 2016-04-13 <CABUevEzq8_nSq7fwe0-fbOAK8S2YNN-PkfsamfEvy2-d3dRUoA@mail.gmail.com>
> > >>> It's fairly common to see a lot of "Incomplete startup packet" in the
> > >>> logfiles caused by monitoring or healthcheck connections.
> >
> > >> I've also seen it caused by port scanning.
> >
> > > Yes, definitely. Question there might be if that's actually a case when
> > we
> > > *want* that logging?
> >
> > I should think someone might.  But I doubt we want to introduce another
> > GUC for this.  Would it be okay to downgrade the message to DEBUG1 if
> > zero bytes were received?
> >
> >
> Yeah, that was my suggestion - I think that's a reasonable compromise.  And
> yes, I agree that a separate GUC for it would be a huge overkill.

There have been numerous complaints about that log message, and the
usual reply is always something like what Pavel said recently:

"It is garbage. Usually it means nothing, but better to work live
without this garbage." [1]

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFj8pRDtwsxj63%3DLaWSwA8u7NrU9k9%2BdJtz2gB_0f4SxCM1sQA%40mail.gmail.com

Let's get rid of it.

Christoph

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Prevent extension creation in temporary schemas
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: PostgreSQL Participates in GSoC 2019!