From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)s-itsolutions(dot)at>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgwin32_open returning EINVAL |
Date: | 2007-12-20 20:29:34 |
Message-ID: | 476AD0AE.6080600@hagander.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 10:26:46AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 07:50:29PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>> 2. Do we really want this to be WARNING? LOG seems a better idea,
>>>> since it's not warning about anything the client app did wrong.
>>> I put it as warning because I wanted to be sure the admin notices. If your
>>> database is hanging 5+ seconds to open a file, you have a *big* problem,
>>> and you need to fix it. Just putting it as LOG will probably make it much
>>> more likely it's missed.
>> This reasoning is faulty. For logging purposes, LOG is *more* severe
>> (higher priority) than WARNING. I think it's fairly common to set
>> log_min_messages = ERROR, which would mean that warnings disappear.
>> On the client side, unless you're issuing queries by hand with psql,
>> it's entirely likely that all non-error messages go into the bit bucket.
>> You can't count on anyone ever noticing them in a production app.
>>
>> Use LOG. That's what it's there for. (If you want a more formal
>> definition, I'd say it's for messages that a DBA would be interested in
>> but are not directly relevant to a client app.)
>
> Ah, wasn't aware of that at all. Then LOG certainly makes a lot more sense,
> yes. Thanks for clearifying.
I've applied a patch for this to head, to get some proper buildfarming
on it. If it passes the tests that Alvaro's contact will be running
(since they had a reasonably repeatable case), I think we should
backpatch it. But not until then...
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dann Corbit | 2007-12-20 20:35:02 | Re: Sorting Improvements for 8.4 |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2007-12-20 20:04:26 | Re: VLDB Features |