On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 07:08 -0800, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Jan 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> w
> > We could either endlessly repeat this
> >
> > ERROR: current transaction is aborted because of conflict with
> > recovery, commands ignored until end of transaction block
>
> +1 for this option.
>
> > I'm also not sure why we would want to single out Hot Standby to
> > generate the reason "because of conflict with recovery" when no other
> > ERROR source would generate such a reason.
>
> Well, most times when the transaction is aborted, it's because you did
> something wrong. Or at least, the failure is associated with some
> particular statement.
>
> If we have other events that can asynchronously roll back a
> transaction, I would think they would deserve similar handling. Off
> the top of my head, I'm not sure if there are any such cases.
Serialization failures, deadlocks, timeouts, SIGINT, out of memory
errors etc..
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
