Re: pg_receivexlog and replication slots

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, furuyao(at)pm(dot)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_receivexlog and replication slots
Date: 2014-09-03 14:40:46
Message-ID: CA+TgmoY71F2ZdCDMxq9NDt-wrvHFOgDhYOTfwstL2aqdf9d7EQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> Do we really want those Asserts? There is not a single Assert in
> bin/pg_basebackup today - as is the case for most things in bin/. We
> typically use regular if statements for things that "can happen", and
> just ignore the others I think - since the callers are fairly simple
> to trace.

I have no opinion on whether we want these particular Assert() calls,
but I note that using Assert() in front-end code only became possible
in February of 2013, as a result of commit
e1d25de35a2b1f809e8f8d7b182ce0af004f3ec9. So the lack of assertions
there may not be so much because people thought it was a bad idea as
that it didn't use to work. Generally, I favor the use of Assert() in
front-end code in the same scenarios in which we use it in back-end
code: for checks that shouldn't burden production builds but are
useful during development.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-09-03 14:44:57 Re: Inverse of pg_get_serial_sequence?
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2014-09-03 14:40:45 Re: RLS Design