Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> I believe the attached patch does this now. Under my test case it
> correctly handled things. I'm certainly happier with it this way and
> apologize for not realizing this better approach sooner. Please
> comment.
Applied (with trivial stylistic changes) as far back as 8.0, which
was the first release that would try to continue after an error.
regards, tom lane