> Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > May 14 21:38:40 sfphotodb001 postgres: [19-1] 2008-05-14 21:38:40
> > PDTLOG: received SIGHUP, reloading configuration files
> > May 14 21:38:40 sfphotodb001 postgres: [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.")
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: