On 06/07/2017 06:37 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/7/17 21:19, Josh Berkus wrote: >> The user's first thought is going to be a network issue, or a bug, or >> some other problem, not a missing PK. Yeah, they can find that >> information in the logs, but only if they think to look for it in the >> first place, and in some environments (AWS, containers, etc.) logs can >> be very hard to access. > > You're not going to get very far with using this feature if you are not > looking in the logs for errors. These are asynchronously operating > background workers, so the only way they can communicate problems is > through the log.
Well, we *could* provide a system view, as we now do for archiving, and for the same reasons. The issue isn't that the error detail is in the log. It's somehow letting the user know that they need to look at the log, as opposed to somewhere else. Consider that this is asynchonous for the user as well; they are likely to find out about the broken replication well after it happens, and thus have a lot of log to search through. Activity logs are a *terrible* UI for debugging systems problems. I realize that there is information it's hard for us to provide any other way. But the logs should be our "monitoring of last resort", where we put stuff after we've run out of ideas on where else to put it, because they are the hardest thing to access for a user. -- Josh Berkus Containers & Databases Oh My! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
