From: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Redundant errdetail prefix "The error was:" in some logical replication messages |
Date: | 2021-03-30 08:30:02 |
Message-ID: | CAHut+PufG363HNvgV8=zfjedKKu6zoJT3v7rHr8ME_sWiWqkOw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:10 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > There are a couple of error messages within the logical replication
> > code where the errdetail text includes a prefix of "The error was:"
>
> Hmm, isn't project style more usually to include the error reason
> in the primary message? That is,
>
> ereport(LOG,
> - (errmsg("could not drop the replication slot \"%s\" on publisher",
> - slotname),
> - errdetail("The error was: %s", res->err)));
> + (errmsg("could not drop the replication slot \"%s\" on publisher: %s",
> + slotname, res->err)));
>
> and so on. If we had reason to think that res->err would be extremely
> long, maybe pushing it to errdetail would be sensible, but I'm not
> seeing that that is likely.
>
> (I think the "the" before "replication slot" could go away, too.)
Thanks for the review and advice.
PSA version 2 of this patch which adopts your suggestions.
------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-Remove-redundant-errdetail-The-error-was.patch | application/octet-stream | 3.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-03-30 08:33:50 | Re: [PATCH] Provide more information to filter_prepare |
Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2021-03-30 08:28:43 | Re: wal stats questions |