Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto
От | Bharath Rupireddy |
---|---|
Тема | Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALj2ACX2UHp76dqdoZq92a7v4APFuV5wJQ+AUrb+2HURrKN=NQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto
|
Список | 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.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: