At Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:08:31 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
<sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote in
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:22 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At Tue, 15 Dec 2020 15:40:03 +0900, Fujii Masao
<masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> wrote in
> >
> >
> > On 2020/12/15 12:04, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > > [40509:startup] DETAIL: Conflicting processes: 41171, 41194.
> ...
> > > I'm not sure, but it seems to me at least the period is
unnecessary
> > > here.
> >
> > Since Error Message Style Guide in the docs says "Detail and
hint
> > messages:
> > Use complete sentences, and end each with a period.", I think
that a
> > period
> > is necessary here. No?
>
> In the first place it is not a complete sentence. Might be better
be
> something like this if we strictly follow the style guide?
FWIW I borrowed the message style in errdetail from log messages in
ProcSleep():
(errmsg("process %d still waiting for %s on %s after %ld.%03d ms",
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs),
(errdetail_log_plural("Process holding the lock: %s. Wait queue:
%s.",
"Processes holding the lock: %s. Wait queue:
%s.",
lockHoldersNum, lock_holders_sbuf.data,
lock_waiters_sbuf.data))));
I was guessing that was the case.
> > Conflicting processes are 41171, 41194.
> > Conflicting processes are: 41171, 41194.
Or I came up with the following after scanning throught the tree.
| Some processes are conflicting: 41171, 41194.
If we use the above message we might want to change other similar
messages I exemplified as well.
I'm not sure what should we do for other anomalies. Other errdetails
of this category (incomplete sentences or the absence of a period) I
found are:
-- period is absent
pgarch.c",
auth.c
