Re: Less than ideal error reporting in pg_stat_statements

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Less than ideal error reporting in pg_stat_statements
Date: 2015-09-22 23:40:25
Message-ID: 15898.1442965225@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> writes:
> I'm not opposed to this basic idea, but I think the message should be
> reworded, and that the presence of two separate ereport() call sites
> like the above is totally unnecessary. The existing MaxAllocSize check
> is just defensive; no user-visible distinction needs to be made.

I wonder whether the real problem here is failure to truncate statement
texts to something sane. Do we really need to record the whole text of
multi-megabyte statements? Especially if doing so could render the entire
feature nonfunctional?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-09-22 23:45:00 Re: Rework the way multixact truncations work
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-09-22 23:38:05 Re: Less than ideal error reporting in pg_stat_statements