Re: [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log?
Date
Msg-id 17518.1386780503@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log?  ("MauMau" <maumau307@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"MauMau" <maumau307@gmail.com> writes:
> I agree that #1-#3 are of course reasonable when there's any client the user 
> runs.  The problem is that #1 (The database system is starting up) is output 
> in the server log by pg_ctl.  In that case, there's no client the user is 
> responsible for.  Why does a new DBA have to be worried about that FATAL 
> message?  He didn't do anything wrong.

FATAL doesn't mean "the DBA did something wrong".  It means "we terminated
a client session".

The fundamental problem IMO is that you want to complicate the definition
of what these things mean as a substitute for DBAs learning something
about Postgres.  That seems like a fool's errand from here.  They're going
to have to learn what FATAL means sooner or later, and making it more
complicated just raises the height of that barrier.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Why the buildfarm is all pink
Next
From: "MauMau"
Date:
Subject: Re: [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log?