Re: [Windows,PATCH] Use faster, higher precision timer API

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Fabris Giovanni Consulente <cons(dot)FabrisGiovanni(at)sia(dot)eu>
Subject: Re: [Windows,PATCH] Use faster, higher precision timer API
Date: 2014-10-24 05:42:19
Message-ID: 5449E6BB.3020001@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 10/23/2014 09:21 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Agreed - I think if you want an error check here it should use elog()
> or ereport(), not Assert().

That's what I originally did, but it's too early for elog.

I'm reluctant to just fprintf(...) to stderr, as there's no way for the
user to suppress that, and it'll be emitted for each backend start.
Though on the other hand it really is a "shouldn't happen" case.

So the options seem to be ignoring the error silently or printing to stderr.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Etsuro Fujita 2014-10-24 06:15:52 Re: inherit support for foreign tables
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2014-10-24 05:18:31 Re: Getting rid of "accept incoming network connections" prompts on OS X