| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bear Giles <bear(at)coyotesong(dot)com>, Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, Michael Devogelaere <michael(at)digibel(dot)be>, Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL crashes with Qmail-SQL |
| Date: | 2002-02-01 19:32:28 |
| Message-ID: | 11824.1012591948@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com> writes:
> Bear Giles <bear(at)coyotesong(dot)com> writes:
>> We can agree that it should be more forthcoming with meaningful
>> help for people setting up the system, but it can't just write an
>> message to STDOUT because its caller has probably already set up
>> a pipe to another process - any error message would normally find
>> itself inserted into the mail queue!
> Gaah. Has djb ever heard of syslog(3)?
Or stderr? There's a good reason why Unix has both stdout and stderr
as part of the standard process model. stderr is for human-readable
error messages. In a noninteractive situation you can send it to
/dev/null, if you don't believe in logging; but when a human is running
a program it's polite to say something on stderr before going belly-up.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-02-01 19:32:35 | Re: Syscaches should store negative entries, too |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-01 19:27:08 | Re: Per-database and per-user GUC settings |