From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "Mike C(dot)" <smith(dot)not(dot)western(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #3790: pg_restore error canceling statement due touser request |
Date: | 2007-12-06 15:08:45 |
Message-ID: | 1196953725.4255.403.camel@ebony.site |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 12:03 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Simon Riggs escribió:
>
> > Sorry to come in on late on this: That wording is better, but it still
> > doesn't explain why it has occurred or what the user should do about it.
> > I think we will get other complaints saying "why has my autovacuum been
> > canceled?" and "what should I do about this?".
> >
> > Perhaps it should be
> > "canceling autovacuum task; will reschedule when user tasks complete"
> > or
> > "autovacuum canceled temporarily to allow user task to proceed"
> >
> > or something that explains that what has happened is a good thing and
> > the task that has been canceled will be automatically re-tried.
>
> Perhaps the added phrase could be put in a errdetail() or something like
> that. The problem is detecting that this is really the case. How would
> it know that it wasn't user-inflicted?
True. We can say "task will be automatically re-scheduled", so that
people understand the message and don't start asking us.
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-12-06 15:19:15 | Re: BUG #3790: pg_restore error canceling statement due touser request |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-12-06 15:03:44 | Re: BUG #3790: pg_restore error canceling statement due touser request |