On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 23:50, Guillaume Lelarge <guilla...@lelarge.info> wrote: > Le mercredi 16 septembre 2009 à 09:53:26, Magnus Hagander a écrit : >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 07:09, Guillaume Lelarge <guilla...@lelarge.info> > wrote: >> > Le mardi 15 septembre 2009 à 18:47:24, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit : >> >> Le mardi 15 septembre 2009 à 09:57:55, Magnus Hagander a écrit : >> >> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 07:34, Guillaume Lelarge >> >> > <guilla...@lelarge.info> >> >>[...] >> >> > If we keep that, how about: >> >> > "The query is longer than the maximum length, and has been truncated. >> >> > " >> >> >> >> Well, we don't really know if it has been truncated. All we know is that >> >> the query is at the maximum length. >> > >> > New version of the patch: >> > >> > * Previously, only the first 250 characters of the query were displayed. >> > * We won't launch the query tool if the selected process is in <IDLE> or >> > <IDLE in transaction> state. >> >> Quick comment: >> The logic around getting the max length is wrong. If the query to get >> it fails, the value of maxlength will be unspecified (the else >> statement only comes in effect if the version is <8.4). How about just >> initializing it to 1024 at the start of the function? Also, the >> "delete set" should be inside the check for NULL value - with a NULL >> returned you'll attempt to delete NULL. >> > > /me ashamed. > > This is fixed. > >> >> Should we bother copying at all if it's short? >> > >> > Don't understand this one ?!?! >> >> I mean if it's cut off, should we actually start a query tool with it, >> or should we just say "hey, this has been truncated" and *not* start >> the query tool. >> > > I think we should start it anyway because there is a chance that the query is > complete. > >> >> If we keep that, how about: >> >> "The query is longer than the maximum length, and has been truncated. " >> > >> > Well, we don't really know if it has been truncated. All we know is that >> > the query is at the maximum length. >> >> We don't, but it's pretty likely. So change it to "it may have been >> truncated"? :-) >> > > Done. > > See the new version of this patch.
I think the third sentence in the error message is unnecessary ("you shuld check this") - that ought to be pretty obvious. But I'm Ok if it's still there as well, so i'll stop complaining now :-) Go for it! -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgadmin-support mailing list (pgadmin-support@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-support