Re: Error-safe user functions

On 2022-12-07 We 17:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> OK, here's a v4 that I think is possibly committable.
>
> I've changed all the comments and docs to use the "soft error"
> terminology, but since using "soft" in the actual function names
> didn't seem that appealing, they still use "safe".
>
> I already pushed the 0000 elog-refactoring patch, since that seemed
> uncontroversial. 0001 attached covers the same territory as before,
> but I regrouped the rest so that 0002 installs the new test support
> functions, then 0003 adds both the per-datatype changes and
> corresponding test cases for bool, int4, arrays, and records.
> The idea here is that 0003 can be pointed to as a sample of what
> has to be done to datatype input functions, while the preceding
> patches can be cited as relevant documentation. (I've not decided
> whether to squash 0001 and 0002 together or commit them separately.
> Does it make sense to break 0003 into 4 separate commits, or is
> that overkill?)
>

No strong opinion about 0001 and 0002. I'm happy enough with them as
they are, but if you want to squash them that's ok. I wouldn't break up
0003. I think we're going to end up committing the remaining work in
batches, although they would probably be a bit more thematically linked
than these.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com