On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> I would make ERRCODE_DATABASE_DROPPED an Invalid Authorization error, >>> rather than a Transaction Rollback code. So sqlstate 28P02 > >> ISTM it should still be in class 40. There's nothing wrong with the >> user's authorization; we've just decided to roll back the transaction >> for our own purposes. > > I agree, 28 is a completely off-point category. But it wasn't in 40 > before, either --- we are talking about where it currently says > ADMIN_SHUTDOWN, no? I'd vote for keeping it in class 57 (operator > intervention), as that is both sensible and a minimal change from > current behavior.
Seems a little weird to me, since the administrator hasn't done anything. It's the system that has decide to roll the transaction back, not the operator. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
