| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Continue transactions after errors in psql |
| Date: | 2005-04-26 14:44:13 |
| Message-ID: | 426E53BD.1040806@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> I would far rather see people code explicit markers around statements
> whose failure can be ignored. That is, a script that needs this
> behavior ought to look like
>
> BEGIN;
> \begin_ignore_error
> DROP TABLE foo;
> \end_ignore_error
> CREATE ...
> ...
> COMMIT;
That seems awful noisy. Why not just:
BEGIN:
DROP TABLE foo;
ERROR: table foo does not exist;
CONTINUE;
etc....
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Harald Fuchs | 2005-04-26 14:47:03 | Re: Continue transactions after errors in psql |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-04-26 14:35:26 | Re: [HACKERS] Continue transactions after errors in psql |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Harald Fuchs | 2005-04-26 14:47:03 | Re: Continue transactions after errors in psql |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-04-26 14:35:26 | Re: [HACKERS] Continue transactions after errors in psql |