Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> Updated version attached. Comments on the wording of the messages are also
> welcome ;-)
Well, since you asked ;-) ... I don't particularly like this.
1. Doesn't distinguish SHARING_VIOLATION from LOCK_VIOLATION.
We might want to know that.
2. Do we really want this to be WARNING? LOG seems a better idea,
since it's not warning about anything the client app did wrong.
3. Doesn't follow the message style guide: shoehorning two sentences
into errmsg() is surely not compliant. Perhaps
errmsg: could not open file \"%s\": sharing violationOR errmsg: could not open file \"%s\": lock violation
errdetail: Continuing to retry for up to 30 seconds.
errhint: OK as you have it.
regards, tom lane
