Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto
| От | Bharath Rupireddy |
|---|---|
| Тема | Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CALj2ACX2UHp76dqdoZq92a7v4APFuV5wJQ+AUrb+2HURrKN=NQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответы |
Re: Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Is there a specific reason that we have a generic WARNING "worker took
too long to start; canceled" for an autovacuum worker? Isn't it better
with "autovacuum worker took too long to start; canceled"? It is
confusing to see the generic message in the server logs while
debugging an issue for a user who doesn't know the internals of
autovacuum code.
To be more informative about the message, how about the following:
1) ereport(WARNING,
(errmsg( "worker took too long to start"),
errdetail("Previous attempt to start autovacuum
worker was failed, canceled.")));
or
2) ereport(WARNING,
(errmsg( "worker took too long to start, canceled"),
errdetail("The postmaster couldn't start an
autovacuum worker.")));
or
3) ereport(WARNING,
(errmsg( "worker took too long to start, canceled"),
errdetail("Previous attempt to start autovacuum
worker was failed.")));
or
4) elog(WARNING, "postmaster couldn't start an autovacuum worker");
Thoughts?
Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: