HS - odd process listing

Lists: pgsql-hackers
From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: HS - odd process listing
Date: 2010-04-30 20:29:45
Message-ID: 4BDB3DB9.2080100@kaltenbrunner.cc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

While playing with HS/SR on -HEAD I noticed that setting

setting max_standby_delay to "-1" leads to the following kind of odd ps
display:

1000 20254 9.2 11.3 8625164 5600644 ? Rs 21:22 1:50
postgres: startup process waiting for max_standby_delay (4294967295 s)

This seems fairly confusing from a usability POV...

Stefan


From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: HS - odd process listing
Date: 2010-04-30 21:44:08
Message-ID: 17154.1272663848@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> While playing with HS/SR on -HEAD I noticed that setting
> setting max_standby_delay to "-1" leads to the following kind of odd ps
> display:

> 1000 20254 9.2 11.3 8625164 5600644 ? Rs 21:22 1:50
> postgres: startup process waiting for max_standby_delay (4294967295 s)

I noticed that a lot of the HS error messages use %u to print integer
parameters. This seemed like a dubious idea to me, but I hadn't made
a concerted effort to get rid of it. Seems like that is what we ought
to do though.

regards, tom lane