On Jul 14, 2011, at 4:38 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Excerpts from Florian Pflug's message of mié jul 13 20:12:28 -0400 2011: >> On Jul14, 2011, at 01:38 , Alvaro Herrera wrote: >>> One strange thing here is that you could get two such messages; say if a >>> file has 100 parse errors and there are also valid lines that contain >>> bogus settings (foo = bar). I don't find this to be too problematic, >>> and I think fixing it would be excessively annoying. >>> >>> For example, a bogus run would end like this: >>> >>> 95 LOG: syntax error in file "/pgsql/install/HEAD/data/postgresql.conf" >>> line 4, near end of line >>> 96 LOG: syntax error in file "/pgsql/install/HEAD/data/postgresql.conf" >>> line 41, near end of line >>> 97 LOG: syntax error in file "/pgsql/install/HEAD/data/postgresql.conf" >>> line 104, near end of line >>> 98 LOG: syntax error in file "/pgsql/install/HEAD/data/postgresql.conf" >>> line 156, near end of line >>> 99 LOG: syntax error in file "/pgsql/install/HEAD/data/postgresql.conf" >>> line 208, near end of line >>> 100 LOG: syntax error in file "/pgsql/install/HEAD/data/postgresql.conf" >>> line 260, near end of line >>> 101 LOG: too many errors found, stopped processing file >>> "/pgsql/install/HEAD/data/postgresql.conf" >>> 102 LOG: unrecognized configuration parameter "plperl.err" >>> 103 LOG: unrecognized configuration parameter "this1" >>> 104 LOG: too many errors found, stopped processing file >>> "/pgsql/install/HEAD/data/postgresql.conf" >>> 105 FATAL: errors detected while parsing configuration files >> >> How about changing ParseConfigFile to say "too many *syntax* error found" >> instead? It'd be more precise, and we wouldn't emit exactly the >> same message twice. > > Yeah, I thought about doing it that way but refrained because it'd be > one more string to translate. That's a poor reason, I admit :-) I'll > change it.
This is happening because a check for total number of errors so far is happening only after coming across at least one non-recognized configuration option. What about adding one more check right after ParseConfigFile, so we can bail out early when overwhelmed with syntax errors? This would save a line in translation :). > >> Do you want me to take a closer look at your modified version of the >> patch before you commit, or did you post it more as a "FYI, this is >> how it's going to look like"? > > I know I'd feel more comfortable if you (and Alexey, and Selena) gave it > another look :-) I have checked it here and don't see any more problems with it. -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://www.CommandPrompt.com PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
