2010/1/13 Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>:
>> well, i actually think that PANIC is too high for this...
> Well, it tries to lock and then open a critical system index.
> Failure to open it has PANIC, it seemed appropriate to use
> the same error level if the lock failure case.
if you try to open a critical system index and it doesn't exist is
clearly a signal of corruption, if you can't lock it it's just a
concurrency issue... don't see why they both should have the same
level of message
Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL
Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas
Guayaquil - Ecuador
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-01-13 14:56:58|
|Subject: Re: lock_timeout GUC patch |
|Previous:||From: Teodor Sigaev||Date: 2010-01-13 14:19:43|
|Subject: Bloom index|