Re: Confusing recovery message when target not hit - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Steele
Subject Re: Confusing recovery message when target not hit
Date
Msg-id 3420765a-a1ae-3edd-9b23-9f6c3d3d5af3@pgmasters.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Confusing recovery message when target not hit  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Confusing recovery message when target not hit
List pgsql-hackers
On 6/11/16 8:22 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
>> It may be the wrong way of going about it, but you get the idea of what I'm
>> suggesting we output instead.
> 
> Surely things could be better. So +1 to be more verbose here.
> 
> +            if (recoveryStopTime == 0)
> +                snprintf(reason, sizeof(reason),
> +                        "recovery reached consistency before recovery
> target time of \"%s\"\n",
> +                        timestamptz_to_str(recoveryTargetTime));
> "Reaching consistency" is not exact for here. I'd rather say "finished
> recovery without reaching target blah"
> 
> +            if (recoveryStopXid == 0)
> Checking for InvalidTransactionId is better here.
> 
> And it would be good to initialize recoveryStopTime and
> recoveryStopXid as those are set only when a recovery target is
> reached.

+1 for Michael's wording.  It's not very clear in the logs right now if
a recovery target was missed.  That makes it very difficult for the user
to determine if PITR worked or not.

-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kevin Grittner
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold <
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Reviewing freeze map code