On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 12:26:01AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I don't understand your elog(ERROR) vs. ereport(ERROR) distinction. Was
> that a typo?
Nope. When Tom upgraded the error handling, he changed almost
everything to ereport(), but in the places where there's a violation of
expected conditions, he retained elog(). We don't provide special error
code, nor there is space for errhints etc.
Those unexpected conditions I thought we could just abort the
transaction tree; but maybe we have to close the backend as Manfred and
Tom say. I don't think there's space for PANIC though (unless we
suspect shared state corruption ... is that checked for anywhere? I
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"No single strategy is always right (Unless the boss says so)"
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2004-04-29 20:46:14|
|Subject: win32 build and test issues|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2004-04-29 20:05:33|
|Subject: Re: Basic subtransaction facility|