On May 28, 3:22 pm, t(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane) wrote:
> Kevin Field <kevinjamesfi(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I use pgTAP to make sure my functions produce the correct errors using
> > throws_ok(). So when I get an error from a plpgsql function, it looks
> > like this:
> > ERROR: upper bound of FOR loop cannot be null
> > CONTEXT: PL/pgSQL function "foo" line 35 at FOR with integer loop
> > variable
> > ...which I can then test using throws_ok by giving it the string
> > 'upper bound of FOR loop cannot be null'.
> Surely, this is a completely brain-dead approach to testing errors
> in the first place ... what will happen in a localized installation?
> What you need is a test that looks at the SQLSTATE code, and little
> if anything else.
There won't be any localized installations.
I wanted to use the SQLSTATE code, but it's always XX000. If there
were some way to set it when calling elog() so I knew the right error
was being reached, that would be a great option. Is that something
under the control of PostgreSQL?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Kevin Field||Date: 2009-05-28 19:53:25|
|Subject: Re: plperl error format vs plpgsql error format vs pgTAP|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-05-28 19:33:15|
|Subject: Re: search_path vs extensions |