> On 17 Jun 2025, at 15:43, Tomas Vondra <to...@vondra.me> wrote: > .. if we > get a failure here, it's not clear to me we can really keep the system > running anyway. It's not just the usual "relcache miss" and if the user > retries it will probably work fine. The catalog is borked, and who knows > in what way.
Agreed. > My opinion is that adding a "elog(ERROR)" here would be misleading, as > it implies it's something we expect. And mostly pointless. I can imagine > adding an Assert, but I don't quite see how is that better than just > hitting a segfault a couple lines later. If I break something here while hacking I'd probably prefer a segfault to an Assert. -- Daniel Gustafsson
