Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink andpostgres_fdw
От | Joe Conway |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink andpostgres_fdw |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3f3f5c79-acb3-5b4b-0e69-9563b9722b84@joeconway.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink and postgres_fdw (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink and postgres_fdw
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/21/2016 04:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes: >> I did notice that postgres_fdw has the following stanza that I don't see >> in dblink: > >> 8<------------------ >> /* >> * If we don't get a message from the PGresult, try the PGconn. This >> * is needed because for connection-level failures, PQexec may just >> * return NULL, not a PGresult at all. >> */ >> if (message_primary == NULL) >> message_primary = PQerrorMessage(conn); >> 8<------------------ > >> I wonder if the original issue on pgsql-bugs was a connection-level >> failure rather than OOM? Seems like dblink ought to do the same. > > Oooh ... I had thought that code was in both, which was why I was having > a hard time explaining the OP's failure. But I see you're right, > which provides a very straightforward explanation for the report. > I believe that if libpq is unable to malloc a PGresult, it will return > NULL but put an "out of memory" message into the PGconn's error buffer. > I had supposed that we'd capture and report the latter, but as the > dblink code stands, it won't. > > In short, yes, please copy that bit into dblink. The attached should do the trick I think. You think it is reasonable to backpatch this part too? Joe -- Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: