Message-ID: <37ff74e14ec83d19c0e7fd3ba35e2f15f99263a1.camel@j-davis.com>
Subject: Re: PANIC serves too many masters
From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 13:39:03 -0800
In-Reply-To: <20231118222911.trznxgya4hvzapva@awork3.anarazel.de>
References: <20231118222911.trznxgya4hvzapva@awork3.anarazel.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.4-0ubuntu2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/37ff74e14ec83d19c0e7fd3ba35e2f15f99263a1.camel%40j-davis.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Sat, 2023-11-18 at 14:29 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> I don't quite know what we should do. But the current situation
> decidedly
> doesn't seem great.

Agreed. Better classification is nice, but it also requires more
discipline and it might not always be obvious which category something
fits in. What about an error loop resulting in:

  ereport(PANIC, (errmsg_internal("ERRORDATA_STACK_SIZE exceeded")));

We'd want a core file, but I don't think we want to restart in that
case, right?


Also, can we do a change like this incrementally by updating a few
PANIC sites at a time? Is it fine to leave plain PANICs in place for
the foreseeable future, or do you want all of them to eventually move?

Regards,
	Jeff Davis