Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nfP04-0003Oh-9v for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2022 16:40:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nfP02-000564-RH for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2022 16:40:46 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nfP02-00055v-HK for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2022 16:40:46 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nfP00-0002QS-S6 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2022 16:40:46 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 23FGedaq1650837; Fri, 15 Apr 2022 12:40:39 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Peter Geoghegan cc: Andres Freund , Noah Misch , David Rowley , PostgreSQL Hackers Subject: Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse In-reply-to: References: <1521388.1649953580@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1547912.1649971995@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1553951.1649975018@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1570894.1649986347@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20220415015249.kfsqxujrf2bn2wz6@alap3.anarazel.de> <20220415024515.GA862547@rfd.leadboat.com> <20220415051205.6abhlilh6fnjgohr@alap3.anarazel.de> <20220415052125.GD862547@rfd.leadboat.com> <1637671.1650032132@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1643035.1650035653@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Peter Geoghegan message dated "Fri, 15 Apr 2022 09:29:20 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1650835.1650040839.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 12:40:39 -0400 Message-ID: <1650836.1650040839@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Peter Geoghegan writes: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 8:14 AM Tom Lane wrote: >> BTW, before I forget: the wording of this log message is just awful. >> [ so how about ] >> "removable cutoff: %u, which was %d xids old when operation ended\n" > How the output appears when placed right before the output describing > how VACUUM advanced relfrozenxid is an important consideration. I want > the format and wording that we use to imply a relationship between > these two things. Right now, that other line looks like this: > "new relfrozenxid: %u, which is %d xids ahead of previous value\n" > Do you think that this juxtaposition works well? Seems all right to me; do you have a better suggestion? regards, tom lane