Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> writes:
> At Tue, 29 Sep 2020 01:03:13 +0000, "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote in
>> Since PG_FINALLY can be used now, I think we can use PG_FINALLY to simplify code here.
> The patch removes PG_RETHROW(), which is crucial in the code
> path.
No, that's not a problem, because PG_FINALLY incorporates logic
to reproduce the PG_RE_THROW action if we get to the code block
due to an error being thrown.
The patch is nonetheless moot, because after a6b1f5365 those
two code paths are no longer identical.
regards, tom lane