Re: [PATCH] V3: Idle in transaction cancellation

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> It sort of looks to me like the LOG_NO_CLIENT error flag and the
>> silent_error_while_idle flag are trying to cooperate to get the effect
>> of throwing an error without actually throwing an error.  I'm
>> wondering if it would be at all sensible to do that more directly by
>> making ProcessInterrupts() call AbortCurrentTransaction() in this
>> case.
> Hm. I think you want the normal server-side error logging continuing to work.

I was thinking we could get around that by doing elog(LOG), but I
guess that doesn't quite work either since we don't know what
client_min_messages is. Hrm...

>> I'm not sure if this would work, or if it's better.  I'm just throwing
>> it out there, because the current approach looks a little grotty to
>> me.
> I with you on the grotty aspect... On the other hand the whole code is not
> exactly nice...

Yeah. I'll try to find some time to think about this some more. It
would sure be nice if we could find a solution that's a bit
conceptually cleaner, even if it basically works the same way as what
you've done here.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company