Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:13 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> It is very difficult to believe that this is a good idea: >> >> --- a/src/backend/replication/libpqwalreceiver/libpqwalreceiver.c >> +++ b/src/backend/replication/libpqwalreceiver/libpqwalreceiver.c >> @@ -445,6 +445,7 @@ libpqrcv_PQexec(const char *query) >> if (PQresultStatus(lastResult) == PGRES_COPY_IN || >> PQresultStatus(lastResult) == PGRES_COPY_OUT || >> PQresultStatus(lastResult) == PGRES_COPY_BOTH || >> + PQresultStatus(lastResult) == PGRES_FATAL_ERROR || >> PQstatus(streamConn) == CONNECTION_BAD) >> break; >> >> I mean, why would it be a good idea to blindly skip over fatal errors?
> I think it is not about skipping the FATAL error, rather to stop trying to > get further results on FATAL error. If the code already includes "lost the connection" as a case to break on, I'm not quite sure why "got a query error" is not. Maybe that PQstatus check is broken too, but it doesn't seem like this patch makes it more so. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers