From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: document and use SPI_result_code_string() |
Date: | 2017-10-02 07:28:20 |
Message-ID: | 67DF9C0A-4187-430A-B39E-CB226FEFE9B0@yesql.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 06 Sep 2017, at 14:25, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Fine for 0002. This reminds me of LockGXact and RemoveGXact in
>> twophase.c, as well as _hash_squeezebucket that have some code paths
>> that cannot return... Any thoughts about having some kind of
>> PG_NOTREACHED defined to 0 which could be put in an assertion?
>
> Generally we just do "Assert(false)", maybe with "not reached" in a
> comment. I don't feel a strong need to invent a new way to do that.
Moving this to the next commitfest and bumping status to Ready for committer
based on the discussion in this thread.
cheers ./daniel
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2017-10-02 07:33:52 | Re: Explicit relation name in VACUUM VERBOSE log |
Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2017-10-02 07:16:23 | Re: [PATCH v1] Add and report the new "in_hot_standby" GUC pseudo-variable. |