Re: SQLSTATE for replication connection failures

Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 6:18 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Shall we just use ERRCODE_CONNECTION_FAILURE for these failures, or
>>> would it be better to invent another SQLSTATE code? Arguably,
>>> ERRCODE_CONNECTION_FAILURE is meant for failures of client connections;
>>> but on the other hand, a replication connection is a sort of client.

>> Your reasoning sounds good to me. So, +1 for using ERRCODE_CONNECTION_FAILURE.

> +1

Done that way. I also fixed some nearby ereports that were missing
errcodes; some of them seemed more like PROTOCOL_VIOLATIONs than
CONNECTION_FAILUREs, though.

regards, tom lane