From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Magic block for modules |
Date: | 2006-05-30 22:20:33 |
Message-ID: | 4582.1149027633@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 08:21:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure we had agreed that magic blocks should be required;
>> otherwise this check will accomplish little.
> Sure, I just didn't want to break every module in one weekend. I was
> thinking of adding it with LOG level now, send a message on -announce
> saying that at the beginning of the 8.2 freeze it will be an ERROR.
> Give people time to react.
Now that the magic-block patch is in, we need to revisit this bit of the
discussion. I'm for making lack of a magic block an ERROR immediately.
I don't see the point of waiting; in fact, if we wait till freeze we'll
just make the breakage more concentrated. At the very least it ought
to be a WARNING immediately, because a LOG message is just not visible
enough.
Comments?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2006-05-30 22:38:08 | Re: error-free disabling of individual child partition |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-05-30 21:16:09 | Re: anoncvs still slow |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | uol | 2006-05-30 22:54:19 | Re: PL/PGSQL: Dynamic Record Introspection |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-30 20:22:24 | Re: [PATCH] Round 2: Magic block for modules |