Alexander Korotkov <a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Actually, the *real* problem with that coding is it lacks a SQLSTATE
>> (errcode call). The only places where it's acceptable to leave that
>> out are for internal "can't happen" cases, which this surely isn't.
> Surrounding code also has ereports lacking SQLSTATE. And that isn't "can't
> happen" case as well.
> Should we consider fixing them?
Yup. Just remember that the default is
XX000 E ERRCODE_INTERNAL_ERROR internal_error
If that's not how you want the error case reported, you need an errcode()
call.
We might need more ERRCODEs than are there now, if none of the existing
ones seem to fit these cases. There's already ERRCODE_DATA_CORRUPTED
and ERRCODE_INDEX_CORRUPTED; maybe we need ERRCODE_WAL_CORRUPTED, for
example?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
