Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:13 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It is very difficult to believe that this is a good idea:
>>
>> --- a/src/backend/replication/libpqwalreceiver/libpqwalreceiver.c
>> +++ b/src/backend/replication/libpqwalreceiver/libpqwalreceiver.c
>> @@ -445,6 +445,7 @@ libpqrcv_PQexec(const char *query)
>> if (PQresultStatus(lastResult) == PGRES_COPY_IN ||
>> PQresultStatus(lastResult) == PGRES_COPY_OUT ||
>> PQresultStatus(lastResult) == PGRES_COPY_BOTH ||
>> + PQresultStatus(lastResult) == PGRES_FATAL_ERROR ||
>> PQstatus(streamConn) == CONNECTION_BAD)
>> break;
>>
>> I mean, why would it be a good idea to blindly skip over fatal errors?
> I think it is not about skipping the FATAL error, rather to stop trying to
> get further results on FATAL error.
If the code already includes "lost the connection" as a case to break on,
I'm not quite sure why "got a query error" is not. Maybe that PQstatus
check is broken too, but it doesn't seem like this patch makes it more so.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
