From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: plpgsq_plugin's stmt_end() is not called when an error is caught |
Date: | 2022-12-15 15:49:39 |
Message-ID: | 3371138.1671119379@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I don't think we need additional PG_TRY() for that since exec_stmts()
> is already called in PG_TRY() if there is an exception block. I meant
> to call stmt_end() in PG_CATCH() in exec_stmt_block() (i.e. only when
> an error is caught by the exception block). Currently, if an error is
> caught, we call stmt_begin() and stmt_end() for statements executed
> inside the exception block but call only stmt_begin() for the
> statement that raised an error.
I fail to see anything wrong with that. We never completed execution
of the statement that raised an error, but calling stmt_end for it
would imply that we did. I think changing this will break more things
than it fixes, completely independently of whatever cost it would add.
Or in other words: the initial complaint describes a bug in pg_hint_plan,
not one in plpgsql.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2022-12-15 16:13:23 | Re: [PATCH] psql: \dn+ to show size of each schema (and \dA+ for AMs) |
Previous Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2022-12-15 14:50:19 | Re: New strategies for freezing, advancing relfrozenxid early |