| From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: document and use SPI_result_code_string() |
| Date: | 2017-10-02 07:28:20 |
| Message-ID: | 67DF9C0A-4187-430A-B39E-CB226FEFE9B0@yesql.se |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 06 Sep 2017, at 14:25, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)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.
cheers ./daniel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2017-10-02 07:33:52 | Re: Explicit relation name in VACUUM VERBOSE log |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2017-10-02 07:16:23 | Re: [PATCH v1] Add and report the new "in_hot_standby" GUC pseudo-variable. |