Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> So this change would deal nicely with the "peer application on the remote >> host is suddenly stopped" case, at the price of being not nice about any >> of the other cases. Not convinced it's a good tradeoff.
> Yes, in the list of failure cases that could trigger this error, the > one that looks like a problem is to me is when a network interface is > disabled. It may be a good idea to let users know via the logs that > something was connected. Could we for example log a WARNING message, > and not report an error? It isn't an "error". These conditions get logged at COMMERROR which is effectively LOG_SERVER_ONLY. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers