From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dominic Bevacqua <dominic(dot)bevacqua(at)bpmlogic(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: incorrect exit code from psql with single transaction + violation of deferred FK constraint |
Date: | 2010-03-09 01:10:38 |
Message-ID: | 201003090110.o291AcJ07161@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Shouldn't that be back-patched?
>
> > Uh, well, it is going to change the behavior of back branches, and
> > because we only got one report of the bug which has existed since 8.2, I
> > didn't want to risk it. Should I?
>
> I would say that the odds of the initial BEGIN failing are negligible
> anyway, so what it boils down to is whether a failure on the final
> COMMIT needs to be reported. Seems to me the answer is "yes", and the
> only reason we haven't had more complaints is that not too many people
> have actually relied on the exit status. Anyone who *does* look at the
> exit status is not going to be happy with the current behavior.
>
> In short: it's a bug, fix it.
OK, done.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Helena Biander | 2010-03-09 08:40:33 | BUG #5366: Stackbuilder doesn't work |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-03-09 00:55:27 | Re: Re: incorrect exit code from psql with single transaction + violation of deferred FK constraint |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-03-09 01:33:42 | lock mode for ControlFileLock which pg_start_backup uses |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-03-09 01:06:22 | Re: machine-readable pg_controldata? |