From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Reporting query on crash even if completed |
Date: | 2017-09-18 17:14:39 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEwR_-tCmbs+ky=oxCSnAcBkc3u0QJ_e3t9SO1FmYLce=A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Now, for pg_stat_activity part of the argument why this wouldn't be
> > confusing was that you could also see the "state" field. Maybe we
> > should try to shoehorn equivalent info into the crash log entry?
>
> Yeah, I think so. Really, I think this is an inadvertency, and thus a
>
Yeah, I agree. That was nothing I recall thinking about at the time, so
strictly speaking it's a bug.
> bug. But instead of just not showing the query when the backend is
> idle, I'd change the display for that case to:
>
> DETAIL: Failed process was idle; last query was: %s
>
> Or something like that. I guess we'd need another case for a backend
> that crashed without ever running a query.
>
+1, this is a better solution.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-18 17:29:32 | Re: Boom filters for hash joins (was: A design for amcheck heapam verification) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-18 17:12:40 | Re: Reporting query on crash even if completed |