Re: A recent message added to pg_upgade - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bharath Rupireddy
Subject Re: A recent message added to pg_upgade
Date
Msg-id CALj2ACVE2bPBsjmWE+gUqOKiNJ94ZkaTUG_YS2Z-teStReEjqQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: A recent message added to pg_upgade  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 9:52 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > errmsg("\"max_slot_wal_keep_size\" must be set to -1 during the upgrade"),
> > errhint("Do not override \"max_slot_wal_keep_size\" using command line
> > options."));
> >
>
> But OTOH, we don't have a value of user-passed options to ensure that.
> So, how about a slightly different message: "This can be caused by
> overriding \"max_slot_wal_keep_size\" using command line options." or
> something along those lines? I see a somewhat similar message in the
> existing code (errhint("This can be caused ...")).

I get it. I think having errdetail explaining the possible cause of
the error is wanted here, something like:

errmsg("cannot invalidate replication slots when in binary upgrade mode"),
errdetail("This can be caused by overriding \"max_slot_wal_keep_size\"
using command line options."));
errhint("Do not override or set \"max_slot_wal_keep_size\" to -1 ."));

Thoughts?

--
Bharath Rupireddy
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Date:
Subject: pg_upgrade's object listing
Next
From: "Fujii.Yuki@df.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp"
Date:
Subject: RE: Partial aggregates pushdown