Re: COPY FREEZE has no warning
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: COPY FREEZE has no warning |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqSzHtpR_epYuDpi3TK8nKh87dSyurBz7WJSDkNDNCzg3w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: COPY FREEZE has no warning (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:42 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
Michael PaquierOn Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:I'll vote for ERROR. I don't see why this sound be a best-effort thing.
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> FWIW, and I won't annoy anyone further after this email, now that its
>>> deterministic, I still think that this should be an ERROR not a WARNING.
>
>> As the FREEZE is just an optimization, I thought NOTICE, vs WARNING or
>> ERROR was fine. If others want this changed, please reply.
>
> The previous argument about it was "if you bothered to specify FREEZE,
> you probably really want/need that behavior". So I can definitely see
> Andres' point. Perhaps WARNING would be a suitable compromise?
+ 1. I was surprised to see COPY FREEZE failing silently when testing the feature. An ERROR would be suited.
--
--
http://michael.otacoo.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: