On 2025-03-04 03:17, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> Agreed and I feel that a message suggesting something like "check if
>> there are any overflowing transactions on the primary side" would make
>> it useful.
>
> I’m wondering if this message might still be confusing for users.
> Would they immediately understand what "overflowing transactions"
> means?
> Even after reading this message, it seems also unclear what actions
> they should take to resolve the issue. Plus, this message can appear
> multiple times if there are multiple overflowing transactions before
> starting accepting read-only connections - which could be even more
> confusing.
It seems better to reconsider the content and timing of this message
output.
I personally think that logging information about this situation where
subtransaction overflowed and it prevents hot standby connections would
be helpful for users and support providers to understand the cause of
the issue.
Do you think such logging is unnecessary?
--
Regards,
--
Atsushi Torikoshi
Seconded from NTT DATA GROUP CORPORATION to SRA OSS K.K.
