"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> none of the other half are printing messages that are more useful
>> than "out of shared memory" (which isn't even necessarily
>> correct).
> I think the messages in the locking area are a bit more useful than
> "out of shared memory", but it would be trivial to build the
> equivalent message in the ShmemInitHash function, based on the first
> parameter.
Right, I was intending to include the "name" parameter in the messages.
This would actually represent an improvement in message quality in a lot
of the cases.
regards, tom lane