On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 13:49 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > > > I'm pretty well convinced that we should NOT be issuing > > ERRCODE_ADMIN_SHUTDOWN for a recovery conflict, but that could be > > fixed by a trivial simplification of the code posted above, without > > introducing any new error code. > > I agree with ERRCODE_ADMIN_SHUTDOWN should not be used for a recovery > conflict. And if your proposal does not need to introduce new error > code, I also agree with not inventing new error code.
> > I'd also be in favor of changing the one that uses > > ERRCODE_QUERY_CANCELLED to use ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE, as > > the former might be taken to imply active user intervention, and for > > consistency. > > +1. We already use ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE for retryable errors, which is almost every error. So no change required there. ERRCODE_ADMIN_SHUTDOWN is used only in situations where we cannot reconnect or retry because the database we said we wished to connect to no longer exists. That needs to be a different error code to a normal, retryable error, so that pgpool can tell the difference between things it can help with and things it cannot help with. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
