From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Continue transactions after errors in psql |
Date: | 2005-04-26 15:19:51 |
Message-ID: | 2246.1114528791@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I would far rather see people code explicit markers around statements
>> whose failure can be ignored. That is, a script that needs this
>> behavior ought to look like
>>
>> BEGIN;
>> \begin_ignore_error
>> DROP TABLE foo;
>> \end_ignore_error
>> CREATE ...
>> ...
>> COMMIT;
> That's a lot of work.
How so? It's a minuscule extension to the psql patch already coded:
just provide backslash commands to invoke the bits of code already
written.
> In this particular case I would actually like to
> see us provide "DROP IF EXISTS ..." or some such.
That's substantially more work, with substantially less scope of
applicability: it would only solve the issue for DROP.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-04-26 15:46:45 | Re: [HACKERS] Continue transactions after errors in psql |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-04-26 15:15:35 | Re: bitmapscan test, no success, bs is not faster |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2005-04-26 15:40:36 | Re: Cleaning up unreferenced table files |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-04-26 15:03:40 | Re: [HACKERS] Continue transactions after errors in psql |