Re: Frontend error logging style

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Frontend error logging style
Date: 2021-11-15 19:45:11
Message-ID: 2147861.1637005511@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Several programs wrap, say, pg_log_fatal() into a pg_fatal(), that does
> logging, cleanup, and exit, as the case may be. I think that's a good
> solution.

I agree, and my draft patch formalized that by turning pg_log_fatal into
exactly that.

The question that I think is relevant here is what is the point of
labeling errors as "error:" or "fatal:" if we're not going to make any
serious attempt to make that distinction meaningful. I'm not really
buying your argument that it's fine as-is. Anybody who thinks that
there's a difference is going to be very confused by the behavior they
observe. But, if we all know there's no difference, why have the
difference?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2021-11-15 19:48:48 Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2021-11-15 19:42:51 Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes