Re: error handling in RegisterBackgroundWorker

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: error handling in RegisterBackgroundWorker
Date: 2017-04-12 02:13:02
Message-ID: 20170412021302.GA2890773@tornado.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 11:33:34AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > I think there is no clear agreement here, and no historically consistent
> > behavior. I'm prepared to let it go and cross it off the list of open
> > items. I believe we should keep thinking about it, but it's not
> > something that has to hold up beta.
>
> Agreed, this doesn't seem like a must-fix-for-beta consideration.

Definitely not a beta blocker, agreed. Would it be okay to release v10 final
with the logical replication launcher soft-failing this way?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2017-04-12 02:15:10 Re: Partitioned tables and relfilenode
Previous Message Amit Langote 2017-04-12 01:32:24 Re: Remove pg_stat_progress_vacuum from Table 28.2