Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2

At Tue, 8 Jun 2021 16:32:14 +0900, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote in 
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 9:47 AM tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com
> <tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
> > > I think we should not reinterpret the severity of the error and lower
> > > it. Especially, in this case, any kind of errors can be thrown. It
> > > could be such a serious error that FDW developer wants to report to
> > > the client. Do we lower even PANIC to a lower severity such as
> > > WARNING? That's definitely a bad idea. If we don’t lower PANIC whereas
> > > lowering ERROR (and FATAL) to WARNING, why do we regard only them as
> > > non-error?
> >
> > Why does the client have to know the error on a remote server, whereas the global transaction itself is destined to
commit?
> 
> It's not necessarily on a remote server. It could be a problem with
> the local server.

Isn't it a discussion about the errors from postgres_fdw?

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center