On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 19:43 +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > On Tuesday 12 January 2010 09:40:03 Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 06:30 +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > > > Currently the patch does not yet do anything to avoid letting the > > > protocol out of sync. What do you think about adding a flag for error > > > codes not to communicate with the client (Similarly to COMERROR)? > > > > > > So that one could do an elog(ERROR & ERROR_NO_SEND_CLIENT, .. or such? > > Seems fairly important piece. > Do you aggree on the approach then? Do you want to do it?
If you would like to prototype something on this issue it would be gratefully received. I will review when submitted, though I may need other review also. I'm still reworking other code, so things might change under you, though not deliberately so. I will post as soon as I can, which isn't yet. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
