From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: psql casts aspersions on server reliability |
Date: | 2016-09-28 13:14:41 |
Message-ID: | 15946.1475068481@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> psql tends to do things like this:
> rhaas=# select * from pg_stat_activity;
> FATAL: terminating connection due to administrator command
> server closed the connection unexpectedly
> This probably means the server terminated abnormally
> before or while processing the request.
> Basically everything psql has to say about this is a lie:
I cannot get terribly excited about this. What you seem to be proposing
is that psql try to intuit the reason for connection closure from the
last error message it got, but that seems likely to lead to worse lies
than printing a boilerplate message.
I could go along with just dropping the last sentence ("This probably...")
if the last error we got was FATAL level. I don't find "unexpectedly"
to be problematic here: from the point of view of psql, and probably
of its user, the shutdown *was* unexpected.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-09-28 13:33:06 | Re: Python3.4 detection on 9.6 configuration |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-09-28 13:12:19 | Re: Logical Replication WIP |