On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 6:35 PM Euler Taveira <euler.taveira@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > + appendStringInfo(&logmsg, "replication "); > + > + appendStringInfo(&logmsg, "connection authorized: user=%s", > + port->user_name); > + if (!am_walsender) > + appendStringInfo(&logmsg, " database=%s", port->database_name); > + > + if (port->application_name != NULL) > + appendStringInfo(&logmsg, " application_name=%s", > + port->application_name); > + > > Your approach breaks localization. You should use multiple errmsg. >
IIUC, isn't it enough calling a single errmsg() inside ereport() with the prepared logmsg.data (which is a string)? The errmsg() function will do the required translation of the logmsg.data. Why do we need multiple errmsg() calls? Could you please elaborate a bit on how the way currently it is done in the patch breaks localization?
No. The strings are specified in the appendStringInfo, hence you should add _() around the string to be translated. There is nothing to be translated if you specify only the format identifier. You can always test if gettext extracts the string to be translated by executing 'make update-po' (after specifying --enable-nls in the configure). Search for your string in one of the generated files (po/LL.po.new).
You shouldn't split messages like that because not all languages have the same order as English. Having said that you risk providing a nonsense translation because someone decided to translate pieces of a sentence separately.
This hunk will break translation. In Portuguese, the adjective "replication" is translated after the noun "connection". If you decided to keep this code as is, the printed message won't follow the grammar rules. You will have "replicação conexão autorizada" instead of "conexão de replicação autorizada". The former isn't grammatically correct. Avoid splitting sentences that are translated.
