On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 5:29 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Kevin Grittner <kgri...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 3:38 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net>
> >> Is there a reason why we don't log which relation triggered the
> snapshot too
> >> old error when it happens?
> > I would probably not want to mess with the text of the error
> > itself, in case any client-side software bases recovery on that
> > rather than the SQLSTATE value;
> Any such code is broken on its face because of localization.
> Perhaps including the relname in the main message would make it
> unduly long, but if not I'd vote for doing it that way.
Is there value in showing which snapshot as well? Something like:
DETAIL: snapshot <xyz> is too old to access relation <relation>
Putting both those into the main message will probably make it too long.