public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Etsuro Fujita <[email protected]>
To: Fujii Masao <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Issue in postgres_fdw causing unnecessary wait for cancel request reply
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 18:59:06 +0900
Message-ID: <CAPmGK15YigmZKzVBGYPdmo-QMHBdhNupK8L6kUBdUtMERkbXsQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<CAPmGK15wkv1=2D2AHefdNcZJpt_d1qX-RW=738yvhyVSGUboTw@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 3:19 AM Fujii Masao <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2023/04/13 15:13, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> > I am not 100% sure that it is a good idea to use the same error
> > message "could not send cancel request" for the PQgetCancel() and
> > PQcancel() cases, because they are different functions.  How about
> > "could not create PGcancel structure” or something like that, for the
>
> The primary message basically should avoid reference to implementation details such as specific structure names like PGcancel, shouldn't it, as per the error message style guide?

I do not think that PGcancel is that specific, as it is described in
the user-facing documentation [1].  (In addition, the error message I
proposed was created by copying the existing error message "could not
create OpenSSL BIO structure" in contrib/sslinfo.c.)

> > former case, so we can distinguish the former error from the latter?
>
> Although the primary message is the same, the supplemental message provides additional context that can help distinguish which function is reporting the message.

If the user is familiar with the PQgetCancel/PQcancel internals, this
is true, but if not, I do not think this is always true.  Consider
this error message, for example:

2023-04-14 17:48:55.862 JST [24344] WARNING:  could not send cancel
request: invalid integer value "99999999999" for connection option
"keepalives"

It would be hard for users without the knowledge about those internals
to distinguish that from this message.  For average users, I think it
would be good to use a more distinguishable error message.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/libpq-cancel.html

view thread (3+ messages)

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], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Issue in postgres_fdw causing unnecessary wait for cancel request reply
  In-Reply-To: <CAPmGK15YigmZKzVBGYPdmo-QMHBdhNupK8L6kUBdUtMERkbXsQ@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