On 10/2/17 03:28, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 06 Sep 2017, at 14:25, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>
>> Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Fine for 0002. This reminds me of LockGXact and RemoveGXact in
>>> twophase.c, as well as _hash_squeezebucket that have some code paths
>>> that cannot return... Any thoughts about having some kind of
>>> PG_NOTREACHED defined to 0 which could be put in an assertion?
>>
>> Generally we just do "Assert(false)", maybe with "not reached" in a
>> comment. I don't feel a strong need to invent a new way to do that.
>
> Moving this to the next commitfest and bumping status to Ready for committer
> based on the discussion in this thread.
committed
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers