> On 17 Jun 2025, at 15:43, Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me> wrote:
> .. if we
> get a failure here, it's not clear to me we can really keep the system
> running anyway. It's not just the usual "relcache miss" and if the user
> retries it will probably work fine. The catalog is borked, and who knows
> in what way.
Agreed.
> My opinion is that adding a "elog(ERROR)" here would be misleading, as
> it implies it's something we expect. And mostly pointless. I can imagine
> adding an Assert, but I don't quite see how is that better than just
> hitting a segfault a couple lines later.
If I break something here while hacking I'd probably prefer a segfault to an
Assert.
--
Daniel Gustafsson