From: Tom Lane on
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii(a)gmail.com> writes:
> In the following debug message in RemoveOldXlogFiles(), the variables
> "log" and "seg" don't indicate LSN, so we should use %u instead of %X?
> elog(DEBUG2, "removing WAL segments older than %X/%X", log, seg);

> I attached the patch to do so.

Applied, thanks.

regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Simon Riggs on
On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 16:13 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the following debug message in RemoveOldXlogFiles(), the variables
> "log" and "seg" don't indicate LSN, so we should use %u instead of %X?
>
> elog(DEBUG2, "removing WAL segments older than %X/%X", log, seg);
>
> I attached the patch to do so.

I think it would be more helpful if it showed a filename. Shall we
change that?

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Tom Lane on
Simon Riggs <simon(a)2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> I think it would be more helpful if it showed a filename. Shall we
> change that?

The point of the committed change was to make that message look like
every other one in xlog.c that shows a log/seg pair.

If we were going to start redesigning the printout format, I'd
personally vote for something that makes it easier to compare LSN
printouts and log/seg printouts, like maybe printing log/seg as the
file's starting LSN. But the main point is that considering any one of
these messages in isolation is the wrong approach. In any case it's a
bit late to be bikeshedding this for 9.0.

regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers