| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: doc patch for savepoints |
| Date: | 2006-11-27 22:58:47 |
| Message-ID: | 25307.1164668327@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 17:48 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I do not see the point of this. Shall we put equivalent disclaimers
>> into every single construct that consumes shared memory?
> Stating that it uses shared memory? Absolutely. Stating that you may run
> out? No, ...
Well, the fact that it uses shared memory is an uninteresting
implementation detail --- at least, it's uninteresting until you run
out. When/if that happens, ISTM the error message and HINT are plenty
good enough to tell you what to do about it. If we tried to document
every possible error message and appropriate corrective action for same
the docs would become bloated to the point of unreadability. So to me
the question is why this particular case deserves a paragraph of its own.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-11-27 23:25:55 | FAQs and Port Status |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-11-27 22:54:50 | Re: doc patch for savepoints |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-27 23:26:01 | Re: Configuring BLCKSZ and XLOGSEGSZ (in 8.3) |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-11-27 22:54:50 | Re: doc patch for savepoints |