On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> ...  So this whole area is a minefield, and the only
>>> attractive thing we can do is to try to reduce the number of errors that
>>> can get thrown post-commit.  We already, for example, do not treat
>>> post-commit file unlink failures as ERROR, though we surely would prefer
>>> to do that.
>> We could treated it as a lost-communication scenario.  The appropriate
>> recovery actions from the client's point of view are identical.
> I'd hardly rate that as an attractive option.

Well, the only other principled fix I can see is to add a new reponse
along the lines of ERRORBUTITCOMMITTED, which does not seem attractive
either, since all clients will have to be taught to understand it.

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to