Re: [HACKERS] psql and libpq fixes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] psql and libpq fixes
Date: 2000-02-08 16:29:36
Message-ID: 2131.950027376@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> This does bring up a thought --- should psql's kill-the-script-on-error
>> option perhaps zap the script only for errors committed outside of a
>> transaction block?

> Why is being in a transaction block important?

I was thinking that the script might be expecting an error, and have
established a begin-block to limit the effects of the error.

But on third thought, probably the thing that would be really useful
for "expected errors" is if there is a backslash-command that turns on
or off the kill-on-error behavior. (The command line switch would
merely set the initial state of this flag.) This way, a script could
use the option in an intelligent fashion:

\kill-on-error off
DROP TABLE t1;
\kill-on-error on
CREATE TABLE t1;
...

It'd still have to default to 'off' for backwards compatibility,
unfortunately, but something like this would be really useful.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-02-08 16:38:02 Re: [HACKERS] Ordering of pg_dump output
Previous Message Vince Vielhaber 2000-02-08 16:22:43 Re: [HACKERS] New Globe