| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| 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 15:03:44 |
| Message-ID: | 20071206150344.GF8451@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
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?
--
Alvaro Herrera Developer, http://www.PostgreSQL.org/
"Las navajas y los monos deben estar siempre distantes" (Germán Poo)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-12-06 15:08:45 | Re: BUG #3790: pg_restore error canceling statement due touser request |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-12-06 14:50:15 | Re: BUG #3790: pg_restore error canceling statement due touser request |