Re: SIGTERM -> elog(FATAL) -> proc_exit() is probably a bad idea

From: Thomas Swan <tswan-lst(at)ics(dot)olemiss(dot)edu>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SIGTERM -> elog(FATAL) -> proc_exit() is probably a bad idea
Date: 2001-01-17 23:55:09
Message-ID: 5.0.2.1.0.20010117175043.02d26b40@tangent.ics.olemiss.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>I'll take care of fixing what I broke, but does anyone have suggestions
>for good names for the two concepts? The best I could come up with
>offhand is BEGIN/END_CRIT_SECTION and BEGIN/END_SUPER_CRIT_SECTION,
>but I'm not pleased with that... Ideas?

Let CRITICAL be critical. If the other section are there just to be
cautious. Then the name should represent that. While I like the
BEGIN/END_OH_MY_GOD_IF_THIS_GETS_INTERRUPTED_YOU_DONT_WANT_TO_KNOW
markers.. They are a little hard to work with.

Possibly try demoting the NON_CRITICAL_SECTIONS to something like the
following.

BEGIN/END_CAUTION_SECTION,
BEGIN/END_WATCH_SECTION

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message bpalmer 2001-01-17 23:58:44 Re: $PGDATA/base/???
Previous Message Ross J. Reedstrom 2001-01-17 23:27:59 Re: $PGDATA/base/???