| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, Juan José Santamaría Flecha <juanjo(dot)santamaria(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Windows port, fix some resources leaks |
| Date: | 2020-01-28 21:11:47 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoap7x9F3XPprvq7AZbT9AhzxcP5ae-PHFSSjiH+cZHuLw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 4:06 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I don't think we have ever expressed it as such, but certainly we prefer
> postmaster to be super robust ... rather live with a some hundred bytes
> leak rather than have it die and take the whole database service down
> for what's essentially a fringe bug that has bothered no one in a decade
> and a half.
Well, yeah. I mean, I'm not saying it's a good idea in this instance
to FATAL here. I'm just saying that I don't think there is a general
rule that code which does FATAL in the postmaster is automatically
wrong, which is what I took Michael to be suggesting.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-01-28 21:16:56 | Re: Removing pg_pltemplate and creating "trustable" extensions |
| Previous Message | Ranier Vilela | 2020-01-28 21:08:17 | Re: [PATCH] Windows port, fix some resources leaks |