| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Zhang Mingli <zmlpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Steve Baldwin <steve(dot)baldwin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding some error context for lock wait failures |
| Date: | 2025-10-09 18:43:26 |
| Message-ID: | 3099729.1760035406@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> There are a few places that do
> ereport(...);
> /* Flush any strings created in ErrorContext */
> FlushErrorState();
> That'd be obsoleted by this change, right?
Oh, I see them, all in guc.c. Yeah, we should get rid of those;
they seem not too safe anyway given that they're unconditional.
>> Do you have an opinion on whether to back-patch?
> I'm a bit worried about it causing problems, although I don't have an actual
> theory as to how. So I'd slightly lean towards not backpatching. But it's just
> a vague gut feeling.
Fair enough. We can always back-patch later if someone exhibits
an actual problem in the field.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-10-09 19:00:36 | Re: Adding some error context for lock wait failures |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2025-10-09 18:34:14 | Re: Adding some error context for lock wait failures |