Re: Is it safe to ignore the return value of SPI_finish and SPI_execute?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Is it safe to ignore the return value of SPI_finish and SPI_execute?
Date: 2019-06-11 19:03:56
Message-ID: 20190611190356.GA27130@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-May-22, Mark Dilger wrote:

> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 1:52 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> > Figuring out what fraction
> > that should be is part of the work --- but just in a quick scan through
> > spi.c, it seems like there might be a case for deprecating practically
> > all the SPI_ERROR_xxx codes except for SPI_ERROR_NOATTRIBUTE.
> > I'd definitely argue that SPI_ERROR_UNCONNECTED and SPI_ERROR_ARGUMENT
> > deserve that treatment.
> >
> > I'm for it, if you want to do the work, but I don't speak for everybody.
>
> I do want to write the patch, but I'll wait for other opinions.

In my perusal, the SPI API is unnecessarily baroque and could stand some
simplification, so +1 for the proposed approach.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Cramer 2019-06-11 19:44:02 Re: Binary support for pgoutput plugin
Previous Message Jan Chochol 2019-06-11 18:47:05 Re: Fix order of steps in DISCARD ALL documentation