On 2021-04-01 19:13, Fujii Masao wrote: > On 2021/03/31 15:16, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: >>> + The memory contexts will be logged based on the log configuration >>> set. For example: >>> >>> How do you think? >> >> How about "The memory contexts will be logged in the server log" ? >> I think "server log" doesn't suggest any concrete target. > > Or just using "logged" is enough? > > Also I'd like to document that one message for each memory context is > logged. > So what about the following? > > One message for each memory context will be logged. For example,
Agreed.
BTW, there was a conflict since c30f54ad732(Detect POLLHUP/POLLRDHUP while running queries), attached v9.
Regards,
Hi,
+ * On receipt of this signal, a backend sets the flag in the signal
+ * handler, and then which causes the next CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS()
I think the 'and then' is not needed:
handler which causes the next ...
+ * This is just a warning so a loop-through-resultset will not abort + * if one backend logged its memory contexts during the run.
The pid given by arg 0 is not a PostgreSQL server process. Which other backend could it be ?
