| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info> |
| Subject: | Re: I propose killing PL/Tcl's "modules" infrastructure |
| Date: | 2017-03-04 08:24:11 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYw2evqCR3BaxKGYeFcjWz7sa0rn8JtBw9fCN1EZ2GWSg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> After thinking about that for awhile, it seemed like the most useful thing
> to do is to set up an errcontext callback that will be active throughout
> execution of the start_proc. That will cover both setup failures like
> the above, and errors occurring within the start_proc, which could be
> equally confusing if you think they apply to the function you initially
> tried to call. v2 patch attached that does it like that.
+1 for that approach.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-03-04 08:31:55 | Re: Cost model for parallel CREATE INDEX |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-03-04 08:23:23 | Re: Cost model for parallel CREATE INDEX |