Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | b5c7b347-e33b-310c-4a2f-b7e0f302674e@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/17/17 12:16, Tom Lane wrote: > I'm confused by the places that change PLy_elog calls to pass NULL: > > - PLy_elog(ERROR, "could not create globals"); > + PLy_elog(ERROR, NULL); > > How is that an improvement? Otherwise it looks reasonable. If we pass NULL, then the current Python exception becomes the primary error, so you'd end up with an "out of memory" error of some kind with a stack trace, which seems useful. The previous coding style invented a bespoke error message for each of these rare out of memory scenarios, which seems wasteful. We don't create "out of memory while creating some internal list you've never heard of" errors elsewhere either. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: