On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 09:24:54 +0900
Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> wrote:
> > The message is truncated in SetBackendCancelMessage() for safety, but
> > pg_{cancel|terminate}_backend() could throw an error on too long message, or
> > warning truncation, to the caller as well. Personally I think a warning is
> > the
> > appropriate response, but I don’t really have a strong opinion.
>
> And a NOTICE? That's what happens for relation name truncation. You
> are right that having a check in SetBackendCancelMessage() makes the
> most sense as bgworkers could just call the low level API. Isn't the
> concept actually closer to just a backend message? This slot could be
> used for other purposes than cancellation.
+1 for NOTICE. The message truncation seems to be a kind of helpful
information rather than a likely problem as long as pg_terminated_backend
exits successfully.
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/runtime-config-logging.html#runtime-config-severity-levels
> --
> Michael
--
Yugo Nagata <nag...@sraoss.co.jp>
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
