| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andreas Seltenreich <seltenreich(at)gmx(dot)de>, Piotr Stefaniak <postgres(at)piotr-stefaniak(dot)me>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in joinrels.c |
| Date: | 2016-08-03 00:08:56 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZRPH99cbLpEzO9ikrwpoeeJYhV7SJ_uCZiiX=0hArKjww@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I think that's just making life difficult. If nothing else, sqlsmith
> hunts around for functions it can call that return internal errors,
> and if we refuse to fix all of them to return user-facing errors, then
> it's just crap for the people running sqlsmith to sift through and
> it's a judgment call whether to fix each particular case. Even aside
> from that, I think it's much better to have a clear and unambiguous
> rule that elog is only for can't-happen things, not
> we-don't-recommend-it things.
+1.
This also has value in the context of automatically surfacing
situations where "can't happen" errors do in fact happen at scale.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2016-08-03 00:41:06 | Re: Slowness of extended protocol |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-08-03 00:05:55 | Re: [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in joinrels.c |