Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Basic subtransaction facility

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Basic subtransaction facility
Date: 2004-04-29 20:08:41
Message-ID: 20040429200841.GI4503@dcc.uchile.cl (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
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
haven't looked.)

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"No single strategy is always right (Unless the boss says so)"
(Larry Wall)

In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2004-04-29 20:46:14
Subject: win32 build and test issues
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2004-04-29 20:05:33
Subject: Re: Basic subtransaction facility

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group