Re: [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log?
Date: 2013-12-09 23:56:54
Message-ID: 30790.1386633414@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> writes:
> Arguably 1-3 are inaccurate since they're not really about a backend dying... they occur during the startup phase; you never even get a functioning backend. That's a marked difference from other uses of FATAL.

How so? "FATAL" means "an error that terminates your session", which
is exactly what these are.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Kirkwood 2013-12-10 00:14:00 Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-12-09 23:52:35 Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good