Re: Some code cleanup for pgbench and pg_verifybackup
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Some code cleanup for pgbench and pg_verifybackup |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 202107261935.tad2ojwemn3v@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Some code cleanup for pgbench and pg_verifybackup (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>) |
Ответы |
Re: Some code cleanup for pgbench and pg_verifybackup
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021-Jul-26, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > - pgbench and pg_verifybackup make use of pg_log_fatal() to report > > some failures in code paths dedicated to command-line options, which > > is inconsistent with all the other tools that use pg_log_error(). > > The semantics for fatal vs error is that an error is somehow handled while a > fatal is not. If the log message is followed by an cold exit, ISTM that > fatal is the right call, and I cannot help if other commands do not do that. > ISTM more logical to align other commands to fatal when appropriate. I was surprised to discover a few weeks ago that pg_log_fatal() did not terminate the program, which was my expectation. If every single call to pg_log_fatal() is followed by exit(1), why not make pg_log_fatal() itself exit? Apparently this coding pattern confuses many people -- for example pg_verifybackup.c lines 291ff fail to exit(1) after "throwing" a fatal error, while the block at lines 275 does the right thing. (In reality we cannot literally just exit(1) in pg_log_fatal(), because there are quite a few places that do some other thing after the log call and before exit(1), or terminate the program in some other way than exit().) -- Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ Essentially, you're proposing Kevlar shoes as a solution for the problem that you want to walk around carrying a loaded gun aimed at your foot. (Tom Lane)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: