Re: Lock conflict behavior? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: Lock conflict behavior?
Date
Msg-id 1232666879.3578.197.camel@dell.linuxdev.us.dell.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Lock conflict behavior?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2009-01-22 at 18:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes:
> > On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 15:08 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> >> If we keep the permission check in LockTableCommand(), I can make a
> >> patch that produces a more useful error message when the table is
> >> removed right before the pg_class_aclcheck().
> 
> > Attached.
> 
> This is pretty horrid, because it converts any error whatsoever into
> "relation does not exist".  For counterexamples consider "statement
> timeout reached", "query cancelled by user", "pg_class is corrupted",
> etc etc.

Ah, I see. Well, I guess there's not a better way to handle that error
after all. There's no way to tell what exception you're catching
specifically, right?

Regards,Jeff Davis



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Explicitly bind gettext to the correct encoding on Windows.
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Pluggable Indexes