On 19.12.23 17:29, Tom Lane wrote:
IMO, we aren't really going to get a massive payoff from this with the current backtrace output; it's just not detailed enough. It's better than nothing certainly, but to really move the goalposts we'd need something approaching gdb's "bt full" output. I wonder if it'd be sane to try to auto-invoke gdb. That's just blue sky for now, though. In the meantime, I agree with the proposal as it stands (that is, auto-backtrace on any XX000 error). We'll soon find out whether it's useless, or needs more detail to be really helpful, or is just right as it is. Once we have some practical experience with it, we can course-correct as needed.
Based on this, I have committed my original patch.
