Re: Issue NOTICE for attempt to raise lock level?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Issue NOTICE for attempt to raise lock level?
Date: 2000-11-07 18:23:33
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0011071919520.1192-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane writes:

> To help debug this, I'm planning to add a little bit of code to the
> lock manager that detects a request for a lock on an object on which
> we already hold a lock of a lower level. What I'm wondering about is
> whether to make the report be elog(DEBUG) --- ie, send to postmaster
> log only --- or elog(NOTICE), so that users would see it by default.

To me this seems to be a little like the much-disputed notice for adding
implicit range-table entries: Either it's an error, then you abort, or
it's legal, then you leave the user alone and perhaps explain failure
scenarios in the documentation. At least until we have something like a
user-configurable warning level.

elog(DEBUG) might be okay, but only with a positive DebugLvl, IMHO.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://yi.org/peter-e/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-11-07 18:33:38 Re: Could turn on -O2 in AIX
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB 2000-11-07 18:22:19 Could turn on -O2 in AIX