Re: elog() proposal

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(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Thomas Lockhart" <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>; "Bruce Momjian"
<pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>; "PostgreSQL-development"
<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2002 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] elog() proposal

> Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)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(at)postgresql(dot)org
>