Bruce Momjian escribió: > Gurjeet Singh wrote: > > May 14 21:38:40 sfphotodb001 postgres[29658]: [19-1] 2008-05-14 21:38:40 > > PDTLOG: received SIGHUP, reloading configuration files > > May 14 21:38:40 sfphotodb001 postgres[29658]: [20-1] 2008-05-14 21:38:40 > > PDTLOG: parameter "shared_buffers" cannot be changed after server start; > > configuration file change ignored
> > What's confusing about this is that the second message says > > 'configuration file change ignored', so I expect the changed (newly enabled) > > archive_command to not take effect. But in fact, it does take effect. > > > > The message probably should be rephrased to say that this setting > > (shared_buffers) will not be changed. > > Actually, no one else has been confused by this wording before, and I > can't think of better wording that doesn't sound redundant. Perhaps this is because not enough people have seen it. I agree that the message should specify that only this setting has been ignored. In any case, this seems a case of stuffing too much in the primary message. I think it should be something like errmsg("parameter \"shared_buffer\" change in configuration file ignored"), errdetail("This parameter cannot be changed after server start.") -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers