Re: Improving deadlock error messages

On Apr 23, 2007, at 11:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
>> On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 19:43 -0400, Neil Conway wrote:
>>> Attached is a very quick hack of a patch to do this.
>
>> Does anyone have any feedback on this approach? If people are
>> satisfied
>> with this solution, I can get a cleaned up patch ready to apply
>> shortly.
>
> I'm really still opposed to the entire concept. You're proposing
> to put
> a lot of fragile-looking code into a seldom-exercised error path.
> I fear bugs will survive a long time in there, and the net effect
> will be
> that we get no information when we need it most. The numeric
> printouts
> may be ugly, but they are reliable.

If we're that worried about test coverage for deadlocks, what about
adding a test to the regression tests? IIRC the framework can
coordinate between multiple connections now...
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)