| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #18070: Assertion failed when processing error from plpy's iterator |
| Date: | 2023-09-17 02:03:10 |
| Message-ID: | 3998850.1694916190@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> Please find attached a proposal of patch for a backpatch, that applies
> on HEAD. The backpatch needs a few tweaks for alternate outputs, of
> course, depending on the version of python.
Yeah, the alternate output files will be a bit of a pain, but
should be straightforward as long as you're paying attention.
My only suggestion is that
+ plan = plpy.prepare("SELECT to_date('DD', 'DD') d")
+...
+DETAIL: spiexceptions.InvalidDatetimeFormat: invalid value "DD" for "DD"
seems unnecessarily ambiguous, and so confusing as to whether the error
message is correct. Let's make the input string be something other
than 'DD' here.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-09-17 02:06:43 | Re: BUG #18070: Assertion failed when processing error from plpy's iterator |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-09-17 01:58:56 | Re: BUG #18108: server process was terminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault |