From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
        pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
        Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>,
        Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: errbacktrace
In-reply-to: <20191108185246.GA17609@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <20191108185246.GA17609@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Fri, 08 Nov 2019 15:52:46 -0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <26475.1574525468.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2019 11:11:08 -0500
Message-ID: <26476.1574525468@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2019-Oct-26, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I hadn't realized that you had already attached a patch that implements
>> your idea.  It looks good to me.  Maybe a small comment near
>> check_backtrace_functions() why we're not using a regular list.  Other
>> than that, please go ahead with this.

> Thanks, I added that comment and others, and pushed.  Let's see what
> happens now ...

I had occasion to try to use errbacktrace() just now, and it blew up
on me.  Investigation finds this:

int
errbacktrace(void)
{
	ErrorData   *edata = &errordata[errordata_stack_depth];
	MemoryContext oldcontext;

	Assert(false);


I suppose that's a debugging leftover that shouldn't have been committed?
It did what I wanted after I took out the Assert.

			regards, tom lane