Re: Error code for "terminating connection due to conflict with recovery"
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Error code for "terminating connection due to conflict with recovery" |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 8518.1296509095@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Error code for "terminating connection due to conflict with recovery" (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Error code for "terminating connection due to
conflict with recovery"
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 14:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The trouble with ERRCODE_ADMIN_SHUTDOWN is that it might lead a
>> connection pooler to expect that *all* its connections are going bad,
>> not just the ones that are connected to a specific database. I think
>> this is a bad decision. Programs that are interested in testing for this
>> case at all are likely to need to be worried about that distinction.
> That's a reasonable argument.
> My objection to a new code is only to one that is so specific that
> people have to program for ERRCODE_BLUE_MOON_ON_A_LEAP_YEAR.
What's wrong with ERRCODE_DATABASE_DROPPED, or something like that?
> Can we invent a new "catch-all" that might be used here? Something that
> means "unknown operational error, not sure what to do".
Because that's not the situation here. We know exactly what a pooler
should do. It might be an infrequent case, but obscurantism isn't going
to help anyone.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: