Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 12/17/14, 10:20 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >>
> >>>* Change the new bit in the errdetail. "could not acquire cleanup lock"
> >>> sounds too much like an error to me. "skipped %u pinned pages" maybe?
> >>
> >>Seems reasonable.
> >
> >Well, that's not always true either; when freezing, it doesn't skip the pinned pages, it waits for them.
>
> Oops. :(
>
> >I.e. this just says how many pages were pinned, without saying what was done about them. That's not very meaningful
toan average DBA, but that's true for many of the numbers printed in vacuum verbose.
>
> In this case it'll mean people will be less likely to report that this is happening, but maybe that's OK. At least if
someonecomes to us with a problem we'll be able to get some info from them. I'll separately look into the vacuum docs
andsee if we can do a better job explaining the verbose output.
>
> BTW, what is it about a dynamic message that makes it untranslatable? Doesn't the translation happen down-stream, so
thatat most we'd just need two translation messages? Or worst case we could have two separate elog calls, if we wanted
togo that route.
Since each part is a complete sentence, you can paste them together.
For example you could do something like
msg1 = _("Could not acquire cleanup lock.");
msg2 = _("Skipped %u pinned pages.");
ereport(INFO, (errcode(ERRCODE_SOME_STUFF), errmsg_internal("%s\n%s", msg1, msg2)));
The use of errmsg_internal() is to avoid having it be translated again.
FWIW I think the vacuum summary INFO message is pretty terrible already.
I would support a patch that changed it to be separately translatable
units (as long as each unit is a complete sentence.)
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
