Re: [HACKERS] psql casts aspersions on server reliability

On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 07:38:52PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 09:14:41AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I could go along with just dropping the last sentence ("This probably...")
> >> if the last error we got was FATAL level. I don't find "unexpectedly"
> >> to be problematic here: from the point of view of psql, and probably
> >> of its user, the shutdown *was* unexpected.
>
> > I looked at this thread from 2016 and I think the problem is the
> > "abnormally" word, since if the server was shutdown by the administrator
> > (most likely), it isn't abnormal. Here is a patch to remove
> > "abnormally".
>
> I do not think this is an improvement. The places you are changing
> are reacting to a connection closure. *If* we had previously gotten a
> "FATAL: terminating connection due to administrator command" message,
> then yeah the connection closure is expected; but if not, it isn't.
> Your patch adds no check for that. (As I remarked in 2016, we could
> probably condition this on the elevel being FATAL, rather than
> checking for specific error messages.)

Yes, you are correct. Here is a patch that implements the FATAL test,
though I am not sure I have the logic correct or backwards, and I don't
know how to test this. Thanks.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Only you can decide what is important to you.