> Review: > > The only possible point of concern I see here is the naming of the C > identifier. Everything else in class 40 uses ERRCODE_T_R_whatever, > with T_R standing for transaction rollback. It's not obvious to me > that that convention has any real value, but perhaps we ought to > follow it here for the sake of consistency?
Yeah. Actually at first I used "T_R" convention. After a few seconds thought, I realized that "T_R" is not appropreate by the same reason you feel. Possible other argument might be "Terminating connection always involves transaction rollback. So using T_R is ok". I'm not sure this argument is reasonable enough though. -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
