Re: "buffer too small" or "path too long"? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: "buffer too small" or "path too long"?
Date
Msg-id 3824880.1655141101@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to "buffer too small" or "path too long"?  (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: "buffer too small" or "path too long"?  (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> writes:
> The root cause of the errors is that the user-provided directory path
> of new cluster's root was too long.  Anywhich one of the four buffers
> is overflowed, it doesn't makes any difference for users and doesn't
> offer any further detail to suppoerters/developers.  I see "output
> directory path of new cluster too long" clear enough.

+1, but I'm inclined to make it read "... is too long".

> # And the messages are missing trailing line breaks.

I was about to question that, but now I remember that pg_upgrade has
its own logging facility with a different idea about who provides
the trailing newline than common/logging.[hc] has.  Undoubtedly
that's the source of this mistake.  We really need to get pg_upgrade
out of the business of having its own logging conventions.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Aleksander Alekseev
Date:
Subject: Re: better page-level checksums
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 2022-06-16 release announcement draft