On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 15:45, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 16:14, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> I'm not really insisting on a redesign. I'm talking about the places
>>> where the code author appears not to have understood that ERROR means
>>> FATAL, because the code keeps plugging on after it anyway. As far as
>>> I can see, using ERROR at lines 3630, 3657, 3674, and 3693 is just
>>> plain bogus, and changing to LOG there requires no other fixing.
>
>> But. I'll look into cleaning those up for HEAD anyway, but due to lack
>> of reports I think we should skip backpatch. Reasonable?
>
> Fair enough.
Here's what I came up with. Seems ok?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
