| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: incorrect handling of the timeout in pg_receivexlog |
| Date: | 2012-06-05 13:47:06 |
| Message-ID: | 29990.1338904026@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> We discussed this before and reached consensus not to use %m :)
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-01/msg01674.php
> :-) there goes my memory.
> That said, we're using %m in a fairly large number of places already,
> but they're mostly in the backend. I guess we're safe there.
It should only appear in elog/ereport calls; if there are any in bare
printfs, they are wrong, just as Fujii-san says. Frontend or backend
doesn't matter.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2012-06-05 13:49:43 | Re: No, pg_size_pretty(numeric) was not such a hot idea |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2012-06-05 13:43:57 | Backup docs |