Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto

From: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto
Date: 2021-10-27 16:26:37
Message-ID: CALj2ACX2UHp76dqdoZq92a7v4APFuV5wJQ+AUrb+2HURrKN=NQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

Is there a specific reason that we have a generic WARNING "worker took
too long to start; canceled" for an autovacuum worker? Isn't it better
with "autovacuum worker took too long to start; canceled"? It is
confusing to see the generic message in the server logs while
debugging an issue for a user who doesn't know the internals of
autovacuum code.

To be more informative about the message, how about the following:
1) ereport(WARNING,
(errmsg( "worker took too long to start"),
errdetail("Previous attempt to start autovacuum
worker was failed, canceled.")));
or
2) ereport(WARNING,
(errmsg( "worker took too long to start, canceled"),
errdetail("The postmaster couldn't start an
autovacuum worker.")));
or
3) ereport(WARNING,
(errmsg( "worker took too long to start, canceled"),
errdetail("Previous attempt to start autovacuum
worker was failed.")));
or
4) elog(WARNING, "postmaster couldn't start an autovacuum worker");

Thoughts?

Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua Brindle 2021-10-27 16:26:56 [PATCH] remove is_member_of_role() from header, add can_set_role()
Previous Message Jacob Champion 2021-10-27 16:14:45 Re: allowing "map" for password auth methods with clientcert=verify-full