Re: A recent message added to pg_upgade

From: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: A recent message added to pg_upgade
Date: 2023-10-27 05:29:52
Message-ID: CALj2ACVE2bPBsjmWE+gUqOKiNJ94ZkaTUG_YS2Z-teStReEjqQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 9:52 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > errmsg("\"max_slot_wal_keep_size\" must be set to -1 during the upgrade"),
> > errhint("Do not override \"max_slot_wal_keep_size\" using command line
> > options."));
> >
>
> But OTOH, we don't have a value of user-passed options to ensure that.
> So, how about a slightly different message: "This can be caused by
> overriding \"max_slot_wal_keep_size\" using command line options." or
> something along those lines? I see a somewhat similar message in the
> existing code (errhint("This can be caused ...")).

I get it. I think having errdetail explaining the possible cause of
the error is wanted here, something like:

errmsg("cannot invalidate replication slots when in binary upgrade mode"),
errdetail("This can be caused by overriding \"max_slot_wal_keep_size\"
using command line options."));
errhint("Do not override or set \"max_slot_wal_keep_size\" to -1 ."));

Thoughts?

--
Bharath Rupireddy
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii.Yuki@df.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp 2023-10-27 05:32:48 RE: Partial aggregates pushdown
Previous Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2023-10-27 05:20:55 pg_upgrade's object listing