public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Bharath Rupireddy <[email protected]>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: more descriptive message for process termination due to max_slot_wal_keep_size
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 19:43:18 +0530
Message-ID: <CALj2ACXmPefRz71OUpFtLF-kWd+bZHYAZ+cPPVSyJCBM1fcwtA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>

On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 9:35 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> As complained in pgsql-bugs [1], when a process is terminated due to
> max_slot_wal_keep_size, the related messages don't mention the root
> cause for *the termination*.  Note that the third message does not
> show for temporary replication slots.
>
> [pid=a] LOG:  "terminating process %d to release replication slot \"%s\""
> [pid=x] LOG:  FATAL:  terminating connection due to administrator command
> [pid=a] LOG:  invalidting slot "s" because its restart_lsn X/X exceeds max_slot_wal_keep_size
>
> The attached patch attaches a DETAIL line to the first message.
>
> > [17605] LOG:  terminating process 17614 to release replication slot "s1"
> + [17605] DETAIL:  The slot's restart_lsn 0/2C0000A0 exceeds max_slot_wal_keep_size.
> > [17614] FATAL:  terminating connection due to administrator command
> > [17605] LOG:  invalidating slot "s1" because its restart_lsn 0/2C0000A0 exceeds max_slot_wal_keep_size
>
> Somewhat the second and fourth lines look inconsistent each other but
> that wouldn't be such a problem.  I don't think we want to concatenate
> the two lines together as the result is a bit too long.
>
> > LOG:  terminating process 17614 to release replication slot "s1" because it's restart_lsn 0/2C0000A0 exceeds max_slot_wal_keep_size.
>
> What do you think about this?
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20211214.101137.379073733372253470.horikyota.ntt%40gmail.com

+1 to give more context to the "terminating process %d to release
replication slot \"%s\"" message.

How about having below, instead of adding errdetail:
"terminating process %d to release replication slot \"%s\" whose
restart_lsn %X/%X exceeds max_slot_wal_keep_size"?

I think we can keep the "invalidating slot \"%s\" because its
restart_lsn %X/%X exceeds max_slot_wal_keep_size" message as-is. We
may not see "terminating process ..." and "invalidation slot ..."
messages together for the same slot, so having slightly different
wording is fine IMO.

Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.

view thread (23+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: more descriptive message for process termination due to max_slot_wal_keep_size
  In-Reply-To: <CALj2ACXmPefRz71OUpFtLF-kWd+bZHYAZ+cPPVSyJCBM1fcwtA@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox