From: | Jelte Fennema <me(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dmitry Igrishin <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Deleting prepared statements from libpq. |
Date: | 2023-06-23 07:39:00 |
Message-ID: | CAGECzQTkShHecFF+EZrm94Lbsu2ej569T=bz+PjMbw9Aiioxuw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 at 05:59, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> [...]
> res = PQgetResult(conn);
> if (res == NULL)
> - pg_fatal("expected NULL result");
> + pg_fatal("expected non-NULL result");
>
> This should check for the NULL-ness of the result returned for
> PQclosePrepared() rather than changing the behavior of the follow-up
> calls?
To be clear, it didn't actually change the behaviour. I only changed
the error message, since it said the exact opposite of what it was
expecting. I split this minor fix into its own commit now to clarify
that. I think it would even make sense to commit this small patch to
the PG16 branch, since it's a bugfix in the tests (and possibly even
back-patch to others if that's not a lot of work). I changed the error
message to be in line with one from earlier in the test.
I addressed all of your other comments.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v6-0002-Support-sending-Close-messages-from-libpq.patch | application/octet-stream | 22.1 KB |
v6-0001-Correct-error-message-in-test_prepared.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2023-06-23 07:43:44 | Re: Infinite Interval |
Previous Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2023-06-23 07:35:50 | Index range search optimization |