Re: Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP?
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9837222c0907250606la9ab4fk425b0d0984703a3@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP? (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday, July 25, 2009, 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. > That would certainly be useful. Personally I'd prefer it to default to that always, and not just in -1, but that would break way too many old things I'm afraid... /Magnus > Shouldn't -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP or some variant by default? > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > -- Magnus HaganderSelf: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: