Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state

On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Jan 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)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.
>
>
Why not do the finger pointing (to HS) in the DETAIL field of the ERROR, and
let the error message remain the same.

Best regards,
--
gurjeet.singh
@ EnterpriseDB - The Enterprise Postgres Company
http://www.enterprisedb.com

singh(dot)gurjeet(at){ gmail | yahoo }.com
Twitter/Skype: singh_gurjeet

Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device