From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Count backend self-sync calls |
Date: | 2010-11-15 00:27:50 |
Message-ID: | 17874.1289780870@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> It might be even better to mention that the reason why we couldn't
> forward the fsync request is that the fsync request queue is full.
> I'm not sure exactly how to phrase that. I thought about:
> fsync request queue is full
> But that seems not to answer the "so what" question. There is an
> example like this in the docs:
> could not forward fsync request (fsync request queue is full)
> ...but I'm not sure I like that.
Well, that example is meant to cover cases where you have to assemble a
couple of independently created phrases. In this case I'd suggest
could not forward fsync request because request queue is full
or, if you think there might sometime be a need to have a strerror
variant, ie
could not forward fsync request: %m
then maybe this would make the most sense:
could not forward fsync request: request queue is full
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-15 00:35:57 | Re: pg_stat_bgwriter broken? |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2010-11-15 00:19:41 | Re: Count backend self-sync calls |