[PATCH] CTDB log message improvements

[Martin Schwenke]

On Tue, 5 Jul 2016 14:24:21 +1000, Amitay Isaacs <amitay at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Richard Sharpe <realrichardsharpe at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Amitay Isaacs <amitay at gmail.com> wrote:  
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Here are two changes to log messages.
> > >
> > > Please review and push.
> > >
> > > Amitay.  
> >
> > I am confused by the wording in this hunk:
> >
> > @@ -1606,12 +1606,14 @@ int32_t ctdb_control_set_recmaster(struct
> > ctdb_context *
> > ctdb, uint32_t opcode, T
> >
> >   if (ctdb->pnn != new_recmaster && ctdb->recovery_master == ctdb->pnn) {
> >   DEBUG(DEBUG_NOTICE,
> > -      ("This node (%u) is no longer the recovery master\n", ctdb  
> > ->pnn));  
> > +      ("Local node %u is now the recovery master\n",
> > +       new_recmaster));
> >   }
> >
> >   if (ctdb->pnn == new_recmaster && ctdb->recovery_master != new_recmaster
> > ) {
> >   DEBUG(DEBUG_NOTICE,
> > -      ("This node (%u) is now the recovery master\n", ctdb->pnn)
> > );
> > +      ("Remote node %u is now the recovery master\n",
> > +       ctdb->pnn));
> >   }
> >
> >   ctdb->recovery_master = new_recmaster;
> >
> > What local node are you referring to? The one the log is printed on?
> >
> > Wouldn't it be better to say: "This node (%u) is now the recovery master"?
> >  
> 
> Oops.  I switched the two log messages around.
> 
> "Local" and "Remote" were late additions just to distinguish between the
> two cases.  The original message sounds much better.
> 
> Here are the updated patches.

Yeah, that's better...  :-)

Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <martin at meltin.net>

If Richard doesn't chime in soon then I'll push...

peace & happiness,
martin