Re: Replication server timeout patch
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Replication server timeout patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTimeDeJvQ0fMhpW1jR-Q6+=hpzbBFmVaWsR4VORT@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Replication server timeout patch (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Replication server timeout patch
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Heikki Linnakangas >>> Should we use COMMERROR instead of ERROR if we fail to put the socket in the >>> right mode? > >> Maybe. > > COMMERROR exists to keep us from trying to send an error report down a > failed socket. I would assume (perhaps wrongly) that > walsender/walreceiver don't try to push error reports across the socket > anyway, only to the postmaster log. If correct, there is no need for > COMMERROR, and using it just muddies the code. I don't think that's how it works. The error the server sends is copied into some of the messages in the client log, which is really useful for debugging. ERROR: can't connect to the server (server said: you're not authorized) ...or something like that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: