Re: Out-of-memory error reports in libpq

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Subject: Re: Out-of-memory error reports in libpq
Date: 2021-07-28 03:32:53
Message-ID: YQDP5RAT+OPQ7E3p@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 10:31:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, there are half a dozen places that currently print something
> more specific than "out of memory". I judged that the value of this
> was not worth the complexity it'd add to support it in this scheme.
> Different opinions welcome of course.

I don't mind either that this removes a bit of context. For
unlikely-going-to-happen errors that's not worth the extra translation
cost. No objections from me for an integration into 14 as that's
straight-forward, and that would minimize conflicts between HEAD and
14 in the event of a back-patch

+pqReportOOM(PGconn *conn)
+{
+ pqReportOOMBuffer(&conn->errorMessage);
+}
+
+/*
+ * As above, but work with a bare error-message-buffer pointer.
+ */
+void
+pqReportOOMBuffer(PQExpBuffer errorMessage)
+{
Not much a fan of having two routines to do this job though. I would
vote for keeping the one named pqReportOOM() with PQExpBuffer as
argument.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2021-07-28 03:40:59 Re: alter table set TABLE ACCESS METHOD
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-07-28 03:23:44 Re: alter table set TABLE ACCESS METHOD