Re: FileFallocate misbehaving on XFS
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: FileFallocate misbehaving on XFS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 202412161705.6u36fgydow3q@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: FileFallocate misbehaving on XFS (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: FileFallocate misbehaving on XFS
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2024-Dec-16, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 9:12 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > Personally I don't like the obfuscation of "allocate" and "zero" vs just > > naming the function names. But I guess that's just taste thing. > > > > When looking for problems it's considerably more work with bytes, because - at > > least for me - the large number is hard to compare quickly and to know how > > aggressively we extended also requires to translate to blocks. > > FWIW, I think that what we report in the error should hew as closely > to the actual system call as possible. Hence, I agree with your first > complaint and would prefer to simply see the system calls named, but I > disagree with your second complaint and would prefer to see the byte > count. Maybe we can add errdetail("The system call was FileFallocate( ... %u ...)") with the number of bytes, and leave the errmsg() mentioning the general operation being done (allocate, zero, etc) with the number of blocks. -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "The eagle never lost so much time, as when he submitted to learn of the crow." (William Blake)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: