| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Christian Kruse <christian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire |
| Date: | 2014-03-18 16:15:26 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYSD4k60-_shHcOH_NWDju8Ayk+F3UqHtAWAq7WN6vMcQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:00 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Therefore I think the only case worth considering here is when
>> database/relation/TID are all defined. The other cases where there is
>> partial information are dead code; and the case where there is nothing
>> defined (such as the one in SnapBuildFindSnapshot) is already handled by
>> simply not setting up a context at all.
>
> Right. So I think we should just keep one version of message.
Well, if we're back to one version of the message, and I'm glad we
are, can we go back to saying:
CONTEXT: while updating tuple (0,2) in relation "public"."foo" of
database "postgres"
Instead of:
CONTEXT: while operating on tuple (0,2) in relation "public"."foo" of
database "postgres": updating tuple
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-03-18 16:15:28 | Re: Portability issues in shm_mq |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-03-18 16:12:21 | Re: Patch: show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire |