Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> I'm thinking that I'll to add a new elog level to signal a can't-happen
> condition within the transaction machinery, which would abort the whole
> transaction tree (more than ERROR) but would not take the whole backend
> down (less than FATAL). What should it be called? Do people agree that
> it's needed?
If you think it's just for can't-happen conditions, FATAL (or even Assert)
should cover it.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-04-20 12:58:26|
|Subject: Re: pg_restore ignore error patch|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2004-04-20 10:05:30|
|Subject: Re: CSV patch applied|