> On Mar 25, 2022, at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Philip Semanchuk <philip@americanefficient.com> writes:
>> I'm trying to understand a behavior where, with our Postgres client, a leading comment in a SQL script causes the
CREATEFUNCTION statement following it to be not executed. I can't figure out if this is a bug somewhere or just a
misunderstandingon my part. I would appreciate some help understanding.
>
> Are you certain there's actually a newline after the comment?
> The easiest explanation for this would be if something in the
> SQLAlchemy code path were munging the newline.
I verified that there is a newline after the comment. But yes, thanks to your suggestion and others, I was able to
narrowthis down to something in SQLAlchemy behavior. In case anyone else comes across this and is wondering --
In addition to accepting a plain string, execute() accepts a number of different SQLAlchemy data types, including
TextClauseand DDLElement. We used to pass a DDLElement to execute(), but a few months ago we switched to passing a
TextClausebecause DDLElement interprets % signs anywhere in SQL scripts as Python string interpolation markers and that
wascausing us headaches in some scripts. Something about the way TextClause changes the raw SQL string causes the
behaviorI’m seeing, although we didn’t notice it at the time of the changeover. I don’t know what exactly it’s doing
yet,but when I switch back to passing a DDLElement to execute(), my SQL function is created as I expected.
https://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/13/core/connections.html#sqlalchemy.engine.Connection.execute
As David J pointed out, execute() is deprecated as of version 1.4. We’re still on 1.3 but we’ll have to move away from
thiscode eventually so maybe this is a good inspiration to move away from execute() now and reduce the number of
deprecationwarnings we have to deal with in the future.
> As far as the comparison behavior goes, psql's parser strips
> comments that start with double dashes, for $obscure_reasons.
> The server is perfectly capable of ignoring those by itself,
> though. (Awhile back I tried to remove that psql behavior,
> but it caused too much churn in our regression tests.)
Thanks, this is most helpful. I use psql to double check I think SQLAlchemy is doing something odd. It’s good to know
thatpsql's behavior in this case is a choice and not required behavior for clients. Peter J. Holzer’s psycopg2 example
couldhave showed me the same; I wish I had thought of that.
I appreciate all the help!
Cheers
Philip