From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: logicalrep_message_type throws an error |
Date: | 2023-07-06 09:28:42 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LSAPLAkfuMk71NpqMY5mC_4Zu2AmeDh21BgKnWa+Dv5Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 10:45 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>
> On 2023-Jul-05, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > On 2023-Jul-05, Euler Taveira wrote:
> >
> > > Isn't this numerical value already exposed in the error message (X = 88)?
> > > In this example, it is:
> > >
> > > ERROR: invalid logical replication message type "X"
> > > CONTEXT: processing remote data for replication origin "pg_16638" during message type "??? (88)" in transaction 796, finished at 0/1626698
> > >
> > > IMO it could be confusing if we provide two representations of the same data (X
> > > and 88). Since we already provide "X" I don't think we need "88".
> >
> > The CONTEXT message could theoretically appear in other error throws,
> > not just in "invalid logical replication message". So the duplicity is
> > not really a problem.
>
> Ah, but you're thinking that if the message type is invalid, then it
> will have been rejected in the "invalid logical replication message"
> stage, so no invalid message type will be reported.
>
Yeah, but it would still be displayed both in context and the actual message.
> I guess there's a
> point to that argument as well.
>
One point to note is that the user may also get confused if the actual
ERROR says message type as 'X' and the context says '???'. I feel in
this case duplicate information is better than different information.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-07-06 09:30:27 | Re: logicalrep_message_type throws an error |
Previous Message | Richard Guo | 2023-07-06 09:26:55 | Re: BUG #17540: Prepared statement: PG switches to a generic query plan which is consistently much slower |