Use RFC 3986 compliant addresses in log messages
When log messages are written with both address and port information, IPv6 addresses can cause confusion if the normal address:port formatting is used. The RFC 3986 suggests that all IPv6 addresses are expressed as a bracket enclosed address optionally followed by the port that is separate from the address by a colon. In practice, the "all interfaces" address and port number 3306 can be written in IPv4 numbers-and-dots notation as 0.0.0.0:3306 and in IPv6 notation as [::]:3306. Using the latter format in log messages keeps the output consistent with all types of addresses. The details of the standard can be found at the following addresses: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt https://www.rfc-editor.org/std/std66.txt
This commit is contained in:
@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ static MXS_MONITOR_SERVERS *build_mysql51_replication_tree(MXS_MONITOR *mon)
|
||||
/* Set the Slave Role */
|
||||
if (ismaster)
|
||||
{
|
||||
MXS_DEBUG("Master server found at %s:%d with %d slaves",
|
||||
MXS_DEBUG("Master server found at [%s]:%d with %d slaves",
|
||||
database->server->name,
|
||||
database->server->port,
|
||||
nslaves);
|
||||
@ -1122,7 +1122,7 @@ monitorMain(void *arg)
|
||||
if (SRV_MASTER_STATUS(ptr->mon_prev_status))
|
||||
{
|
||||
/** Master failed, can't recover */
|
||||
MXS_NOTICE("Server %s:%d lost the master status.",
|
||||
MXS_NOTICE("Server [%s]:%d lost the master status.",
|
||||
ptr->server->name,
|
||||
ptr->server->port);
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -1131,12 +1131,12 @@ monitorMain(void *arg)
|
||||
if (mon_status_changed(ptr))
|
||||
{
|
||||
#if defined(SS_DEBUG)
|
||||
MXS_INFO("Backend server %s:%d state : %s",
|
||||
MXS_INFO("Backend server [%s]:%d state : %s",
|
||||
ptr->server->name,
|
||||
ptr->server->port,
|
||||
STRSRVSTATUS(ptr->server));
|
||||
#else
|
||||
MXS_DEBUG("Backend server %s:%d state : %s",
|
||||
MXS_DEBUG("Backend server [%s]:%d state : %s",
|
||||
ptr->server->name,
|
||||
ptr->server->port,
|
||||
STRSRVSTATUS(ptr->server));
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user