From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18070: Assertion failed when processing error from plpy's iterator
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2023 20:02:03 -0400
Message-ID: <3984911.1694908923@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZQY/Nfv20tt4PBzA@paquier.xyz>
References: <18070-ab9c171cbf4ebb0f@postgresql.org>
<9fa9c154-d084-07de-8224-aab7fc8a119e@gmail.com>
<ZQVm8KponTxqj8G3@paquier.xyz>
<3920993.1694874885@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<5eba3ea5-ae13-aab2-35d6-cd3e58dab08b@gmail.com>
<ZQY/Nfv20tt4PBzA@paquier.xyz>
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> Btw, backpatching a change in the error infrastructure does not seem a
> good idea to me, as there could be applications that depend on the
> existing behaviors? It looks like we'd better just remove the
> assertion in back-branches.
+1. Not very sure what we want to change this to in HEAD, but
I wouldn't backpatch a behavioral change here.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, michael@paquier.xyz, exclusion@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18070: Assertion failed when processing error from plpy's iterator
In-Reply-To: <3984911.1694908923@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox