On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: >> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote: >>> FWIW, and I won't annoy anyone further after this email, now that its >>> deterministic, I still think that this should be an ERROR not a WARNING. > >> As the FREEZE is just an optimization, I thought NOTICE, vs WARNING or >> ERROR was fine. If others want this changed, please reply. > > The previous argument about it was "if you bothered to specify FREEZE, > you probably really want/need that behavior". So I can definitely see > Andres' point. Perhaps WARNING would be a suitable compromise?
I'll vote for ERROR. I don't see why this sound be a best-effort thing. -- 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
