Re: [HACKERS] Win32 WEXITSTATUS too

From: "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "PostgreSQL-patches" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Win32 WEXITSTATUS too
Date: 2007-01-23 01:26:31
Message-ID: 019e01c73e8d$838830c0$19527c0a@OPERAO
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

From: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Basically this whole idea is misconceived. Just print the number
and
>> have done.
>
> And how do people interpret that number?

I understand that "people" Bruce-san is saying means PostgreSQL
developers, not ordinary users.
When ordinary users encounter an Win32 exception, what they can do is
to report the message and the description of phenomenon to PostgreSQL
developers. What can they do when they see the descriptive text of an
exception code, such as "Access violation" for 0xC0000005? An
exception means a bug of PostgreSQL. Win32 exceptions are different
from errno on UNIX (counterpart of which is Win32 error code.) Can
they avoid the exception by changing PostgreSQL settings? If luckly
so in one case, can they think of the treatment from the message?

If "people" means PostgreSQL developers, the descriptive text is not
necessary either. I think the developers who try to solve the bug
know where to refer to interpret the exception code.

My opinion is the same as Tom-san's.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2007-01-23 01:37:54 Re: [HACKERS] Win32 WEXITSTATUS too
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2007-01-22 23:21:17 Re: [pgsql-patches] Win32 WEXITSTATUS too