X-Original-To: pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF65FD8239;
	Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:03:59 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 78424-09; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 22:03:57 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de
	[212.227.126.187])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91FDBD81BB;
	Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:03:56 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from h-67-103-45-218.snfccasy.covad.net [67.103.45.218]
	(helo=stromboli) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de with ESMTP (Nemesis),
	id 0MKxQS-1EGOIW1wCi-0008Jv; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 00:03:08 +0200
From: "Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
To: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
	"Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: "PostgreSQL-documentation" <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>,
	<pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] statement_timeout logging
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 00:02:23 -0700
Message-ID: <KGEFLMPJFBNNLNOOOPLGKEFICJAA.simon@2ndquadrant.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
In-reply-to: <20050916205455.GA9069@surnet.cl>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Importance: Normal
X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de
	login:51320d06ba6b43864a3fe5d428030dbe
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.202 required=5 tests=[DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12=1.202]
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Archive-Number: 200509/27
X-Sequence-Number: 3213

>Alvaro Herrera
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 03:41:11PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > I have updated the message to:
> > >
> > >      errmsg("canceling query due to user request or
> statement timeout")));
> >
> > Oops.  Did we freeze the message strings already for this release?
>
> Not yet.
>
> I'm not sure I agree with the wording though -- is there no
> way to tell
> the difference?

Yes, my patch. :-)

The message is generated following receipt of a SIGINT which is sent by
kill() after the statement_timeout.

My patch was able to generate a different message by logging just before
the kill() is called. (Obviously, there isn't much "after" in this
circumstance).

Best Regards, Simon Riggs