Hi,
On 2022-03-21 11:27:15 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 4:39 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> >
> > before we further change this (as done in this patch) we should deduplicate
> > these huge statements in a separate patch / commit.
>
> Something like attached
> v6-0001-Deduplicate-checkpoint-restartpoint-complete-mess.patch?
Mostly. I don't see a reason for the use of the stringinfo. And I think
LogCheckpointStart() should be dealt with similarly.
I'd just make it a restartpoint ? _("restartpoint") : _("checkpoint") or such
in the argument? Then translators don't need to translate the two messages
separately.
Or we could just not translate restartpoint/checkpoint - after all we don't
translate the flags in LogCheckpointStart() either. But on balance I'd lean
towards the above.
> > This practically doubles the size of the log message - doesn't that seem a
> > bit
> > disproportionate? Can we make this more dense? "logical decoding rewrite
> > mapping file(s) removed=" and "logical decoding snapshot file(s) removed="
> > is
> > quite long.
>
> Do you suggest something like below? Or some other better wording like
> "logical decoding rewrite map files" and "logical decoding snapshot
> files" or "logical rewrite map files" and "logical snapshot files" or
> just "rewrite mapping files" or "snapshot files" .... ?
Both seem still very long. I still am doubtful this level of detail is
appropriate. Seems more like a thing for a tracepoint or such. How about just
printing the time for the logical decoding operations in aggregate, without
breaking down into files, adding LSNs etc?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
