Re: [PATCH] Windows port, fix some resources leaks
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Windows port, fix some resources leaks |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+Tgmoap7x9F3XPprvq7AZbT9AhzxcP5ae-PHFSSjiH+cZHuLw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Windows port, fix some resources leaks (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Windows port, fix some resources leaks
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 4:06 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > I don't think we have ever expressed it as such, but certainly we prefer > postmaster to be super robust ... rather live with a some hundred bytes > leak rather than have it die and take the whole database service down > for what's essentially a fringe bug that has bothered no one in a decade > and a half. Well, yeah. I mean, I'm not saying it's a good idea in this instance to FATAL here. I'm just saying that I don't think there is a general rule that code which does FATAL in the postmaster is automatically wrong, which is what I took Michael to be suggesting. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: