Re: pl/python tracebacks

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pl/python tracebacks
Date: 2011-03-01 21:12:16
Message-ID: 1299013936.30816.6.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On tis, 2011-03-01 at 21:10 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote:
> So you end up with a context message saying "PL/Python function %s"
> and a detail message with the saved detail (if it's present) *and* the
> traceback. The problem is that the name of the function is already in
> the traceback, so there's no need for the context *if* there's a
> traceback present.

I wouldn't actually worry about that bit of redundancy so much. Getting
proper context for nested calls is much more important.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-03-01 21:12:28 Re: Alpha4 release blockers (was Re: wrapping up this CommitFest)
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2011-03-01 21:07:25 Re: Alpha4 release blockers (was Re: wrapping up this CommitFest)