| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse |
| Date: | 2022-04-14 17:07:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmO_vNK-hsjWVGXWBsON2Rya3fZ7qKxaMxhJzAE=wdCvA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 9:48 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> I think it might be worth leaving in, but let's debate that separately?
> I'm thinking of something like the attached.
The current convention for the "extra" ereport()s that VACUUM VERBOSE
outputs at INFO elevel is to use DEBUG2 elevel in all other cases
(these extra messages are considered part of VACUUM VERBOSE output,
but are *not* considered part of the autovacuum log output).
It looks like you're changing the elevel convention for these "extra"
messages with this patch. That might be fine, but don't forget about
similar ereports() in vacuumparallel.c. I think that the elevel should
probably remain uniform across all of these messages. Though I don't
particular care if it's DEBUG2 or DEBUG5.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2022-04-14 17:12:42 | Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-04-14 16:58:37 | Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("HaveRegisteredOrActiveSnapshot()", File: "toast_internals.c", Line: 670, PID: 19403) |