Re: logicalrep_message_type throws an error

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: logicalrep_message_type throws an error
Date: 2023-07-18 03:15:12
Message-ID: CAA4eK1+A3h9rmboKA9UH_Fzbw+zJax1WPxgtme=kfvp-8chG6w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 7:54 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>
> On 2023-Jul-17, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>
> > Prologue of psprintf() says
> >
> > * Errors are not returned to the caller, but are reported via elog(ERROR)
> > * in the backend, or printf-to-stderr-and-exit() in frontend builds.
> > * One should therefore think twice about using this in libpq.
> >
> > If an error occurs in psprintf(), it will throw an error which will
> > override the original error. I think we should avoid any stuff that
> > throws further errors.
>
> Ooh, yeah, this is an excellent point. I agree it would be better to
> avoid psprintf() here and anything that adds more failure modes.
>

I have tried to check whether we have such usage in any other error
callbacks. Though I haven't scrutinized each and every error callback,
I found a few of them where an error can be raised. For example,

rm_redo_error_callback()->initStringInfo()
CopyFromErrorCallback()->limit_printout_length()
shared_buffer_write_error_callback()->relpathperm()->relpathbackend()->GetRelationPath()->psprintf()

> Let's
> just do the thing in the original patch you submitted, to ensure all
> these strings are compile-time constants; that's likely the most robust.
>

So will we be okay with something like the below:

ERROR: invalid logical replication message type "??? (88)"
CONTEXT: processing remote data for replication origin "pg_16638"
during message type "???" in transaction 796, finished at
0/1626698

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2023-07-18 03:28:52 Volatile write caches on macOS and Windows, redux
Previous Message Fujii.Yuki@df.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp 2023-07-18 01:35:53 RE: Partial aggregates pushdown