At Thu, 29 Sep 2022 11:29:40 +0900, bt22nakamorit <bt22nakamorit@oss.nttdata.com> wrote in
> 2022-09-28 21:49 に torikoshia さんは書きました:
> >> if (result == 127 || result == -1)
> >> {
> >> pg_log_error("\\!: failed");
> >> return false;
> >> }
> >> else if (result != 0) {
> >> pg_log_error("command failed");
> >> return false;
> > Since it would be hard to understand the cause of failures from these
> > two messages, it might be better to clarify them in the messages.
> > The former comes from failures of child process creation or execution
> > on it and the latter occurs when child process creation and execution
> > succeeded but the return code is not 0, doesn't it?
> > I also felt it'd be natural that the latter message also begins with
> > "\\!" since both message concerns with \!.
> > How do you think?
>
> Thank you for the feedback!
> I agree that the messages should be more clear.
> \\!: command was not executed
> \\!: command failed
> Would these two messages be enough to describe the two cases?
FWIW, I would spell these as something like this:
> \\!: command execution failure: %m
> \\!: command returned failure status: %d
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
