From: Robert Haas on
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I spend a little bit of time analyzing this today and it appears to me
> that all of the calls to emode_for_corrupt_record() arrive via
> ReadRecord(), which itself takes an emode argument that is always
> passed by the caller as either LOG or PANIC. �Therefore, the effect of
> the first "if" test in emode_for_corrupt_record() is to reduce the
> logging level of messages coming from SR or the archive from LOG to
> WARNING. �(WARNING would be higher in an interactive session, but not
> here, per Tom's point.) �This seems clearly a bad idea, so I propose
> to rip it out, which simplifies this function considerably. �Proposed
> patch attached.

Since this appears to be non-controversial, I'm going to go ahead and commit it.

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

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers