On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 12:26:01AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I don't understand your elog(ERROR) vs. ereport(ERROR) distinction. Was
> that a typo?
Nope. When Tom upgraded the error handling, he changed almost
everything to ereport(), but in the places where there's a violation of
expected conditions, he retained elog(). We don't provide special error
code, nor there is space for errhints etc.
Those unexpected conditions I thought we could just abort the
transaction tree; but maybe we have to close the backend as Manfred and
Tom say. I don't think there's space for PANIC though (unless we
suspect shared state corruption ... is that checked for anywhere? I
haven't looked.)
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"No single strategy is always right (Unless the boss says so)"
(Larry Wall)
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
