Re: SIGTERM -> elog(FATAL) -> proc_exit() is probably a bad idea - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Swan
Subject Re: SIGTERM -> elog(FATAL) -> proc_exit() is probably a bad idea
Date
Msg-id 5.0.2.1.0.20010117175043.02d26b40@tangent.ics.olemiss.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SIGTERM -> elog(FATAL) -> proc_exit() is probably a bad idea  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
>I'll take care of fixing what I broke, but does anyone have suggestions
>for good names for the two concepts?  The best I could come up with
>offhand is BEGIN/END_CRIT_SECTION and BEGIN/END_SUPER_CRIT_SECTION,
>but I'm not pleased with that... Ideas?

Let CRITICAL be critical.  If the other section are there just to be 
cautious.  Then the name should represent that.  While I like the 
BEGIN/END_OH_MY_GOD_IF_THIS_GETS_INTERRUPTED_YOU_DONT_WANT_TO_KNOW 
markers.. They are a little hard to work with.

Possibly try demoting the NON_CRITICAL_SECTIONS to something like the 
following.

BEGIN/END_CAUTION_SECTION,
BEGIN/END_WATCH_SECTION



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Ross J. Reedstrom"
Date:
Subject: Re: $PGDATA/base/???
Next
From: bpalmer
Date:
Subject: Re: $PGDATA/base/???