How about 'perdition'? Perhaps not common enough, but it seems to
describe the situation pretty well. If you know the word it's way
worse than fatal.
Complete destruction, loss, ruin...
--
Rod Taylor
This message represents the official view of the voices in my head
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Thomas Lockhart" <lockhart@fourpalms.org>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net>; "Bruce Momjian"
<pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; "PostgreSQL-development"
<pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2002 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] elog() proposal
> Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@fourpalms.org> writes:
> > I'm with Peter on this one; let's find another more neutral name.
>
> Proposals then? What's been used or bandied about so far are
> "REALLYFATAL" (yuck, even though I take the blame for it).
> "STOP" (Vadim put this in, but I object to it as being too vague;
> it's not at all obvious that it's worse than FATAL).
> "FATALALL" (also yuck).
>
> Surely we can find something that's short, memorable, and clearly
> a notch more fatal than FATAL.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of
broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to
majordomo@postgresql.org
>