Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 02:19:30PM +0200, Antonin Houska wrote: > > I'd expect that the pg_log_fatal() should be called when the error is > > serious > > enough to cause premature exit, but I can see cases where even > > pg_log_error() > > is followed by exit(1). pg_waldump makes me feel that pg_log_error() is used > > to handle incorrect user input (before the actual execution started) while > > pg_log_fatal() handles error conditions that user does not fully control > > (things that happen during the actual execution). But this is rather a > > guess. > > I agree with what you say when pg_log_fatal should be used for an > error bad enough that the binary should exit immediately. In the case > of pg_waldump, not using pg_log_fatal() makes the code more readable > because there is no need to repeat the "Try --help for more > information on a bad argument".
I'd understand this if pg_log_fatal() called exit() itself, but it does not (unless I miss something). > Have you spotted other areas of the code where it makes sense to change a > pg_log_error() + exit to a single pg_log_fatal()? I haven't done an exhaustive search so far, but as I mentioned above, pg_log_fatal() does not seem to be "pg_log_error() + exit()". -- Antonin Houska Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com
