Re: Confusing message in log file - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Confusing message in log file
Date
Msg-id 20080630230204.GD18252@alvh.no-ip.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Confusing message in log file  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: Confusing message in log file  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian escribió:
> Gurjeet Singh wrote:

> > May 14 21:38:40 sfphotodb001 postgres[29658]: [19-1] 2008-05-14 21:38:40
> > PDTLOG:  received SIGHUP, reloading configuration files
> > May 14 21:38:40 sfphotodb001 postgres[29658]: [20-1] 2008-05-14 21:38:40
> > PDTLOG:  parameter "shared_buffers" cannot be changed after server start;
> > configuration file change ignored

> >     What's confusing about this is that the second message says
> > 'configuration file change ignored', so I expect the changed (newly enabled)
> > archive_command to not take effect. But in fact, it does take effect.
> > 
> >     The message probably should be rephrased to say that this setting
> > (shared_buffers) will not be changed.
> 
> Actually, no one else has been confused by this wording before, and I
> can't think of better wording that doesn't sound redundant.

Perhaps this is because not enough people have seen it.  I agree that
the message should specify that only this setting has been ignored.

In any case, this seems a case of stuffing too much in the primary
message.  I think it should be something like

errmsg("parameter \"shared_buffer\" change in configuration file ignored"),
errdetail("This parameter cannot be changed after server start.")

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Confusing message in log file
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Planned obsolescence in identify_system_timezone()