Re: Explicit subtransactions for PL/Tcl

2017-03-09 11:45 GMT+01:00 Victor Wagner <vitus(at)wagner(dot)pp(dot)ru>:

> On Thu, 9 Mar 2017 11:12:09 +0100
> Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> > the regress tests is unstable
> >
> > the proc name has mutable pid
> >
> > ! (procedure "__PLTcl_proc_16503" line 3)
> > invoked from within
> > ! "__PLTcl_proc_16503 SPI"
> >
> > Regards
>
> Really, I don't know what can be done with it, short of rewriting all
> tests as tap-tests.
>
> Definitely this patch is not the right place for reversing desing
> decision of PL/Tcl authors to add a numeric suffix to the proc names.
> (it is not PID. It is OID of the function).
>
> Of course, I can catch all the errors inside Tcl code and return
> just message, but it would sufficiently narrow test functionality.
>
> Now test demonstrate how errors uncaught on the Tcl level interact with
> postgresql error system.
>

you can catch the exception outside and write own message

Pavel

>
>
>
> With best regards, Victor
>
> --
> Victor Wagner <vitus(at)wagner(dot)pp(dot)ru>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>