On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 19:43 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 January 2010 09:40:03 Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 06:30 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > Currently the patch does not yet do anything to avoid letting the
> > > protocol out of sync. What do you think about adding a flag for error
> > > codes not to communicate with the client (Similarly to COMERROR)?
> > >
> > > So that one could do an elog(ERROR & ERROR_NO_SEND_CLIENT, .. or such?
> > Seems fairly important piece.
> Do you aggree on the approach then? Do you want to do it?
If you would like to prototype something on this issue it would be
gratefully received. I will review when submitted, though I may need
other review also.
I'm still reworking other code, so things might change under you, though
not deliberately so. I will post as soon as I can, which isn't yet.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
