Re: Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP?
| От | Bernd Helmle | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP? | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | D0D7895C7E76DF3DCA08EF9D@teje обсуждение исходный текст | 
| Ответ на | Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP? (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) | 
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
--On Samstag, Juli 25, 2009 16:00:18 +0300 Peter Eisentraut 
<peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> When you run a file with psql -1/--single-transaction, and a command
> fails,  you get bombarded with
>
> ERROR:  current transaction is aborted, commands ignored until end of
> transaction block
>
> for the rest of the file.
>
> Shouldn't -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP or some variant by default?
Only if it could ensured that embedded SAVEPOINTS can be handled 
properly...a quick check shows that ON_ERROR_STOP will stop any script even 
when the errorneous command is probably rolled back by a subsequent 
ROLLBACK TO:
SELECT 1;
SAVEPOINT A;
SELECT et; <-- ON_ERROR_STOP stops here
ROLLBACK TO A;
SELECT 2;
It seems -1 needs some smarter variant of ON_ERROR_STOP.
--  Thanks
                   Bernd
		
	В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: