Hello, Thank you for comments.
>Above test not throwing psql error, as you used strcmp(newval,"ON"). You >should use pg_strcasecmp. Corrected in the attached. >Above error coming because in below code block change, you don't have check for >command (you should check opt0 for AUTOCOMMIT command) Corrected in the attached. >postgres=# BEGIN; >BEGIN >postgres=# create table foo ( a int ); >CREATE TABLE >postgres=# \set AUTOCOMMIT ON >Don't you think, in above case also we should throw a psql error? IMO, in this case BEGIN is explicitly specified by user, so I think it is understood that a commit is required for changes to be effective. Hence I did not consider this case. >postgres=# \set AUTOCOMMIT off >postgres=# create table foo ( a int ); >CREATE TABLE >postgres=# \set XYZ ON >\set: Cannot set XYZ to ON inside a transaction, either COMMIT or ROLLBACK and retry >May be you would like to move the new code block inside SetVariable(). So that >don't need to worry about the validity of the variable names. I think validating variable names wont be required if we throw error only if command is \set AUTOCOMMIT. Validation can happen later as in the existing code. >Basically if I understand correctly, if we are within transaction and someone >tries the set the AUTOCOMMIT ON, it should throw a psql error. Correct me >if I am missing anything? Yes the psql_error is thrown when AUTOCOMMIT is turned on inside a transaction. But only when there is an implicit BEGIN as in following case, postgres=# \set AUTOCOMMIT OFF postgres=# create table test(i int); CREATE TABLE postgres=# \set AUTOCOMMIT ON \set: Cannot set AUTOCOMMIT to ON inside a transaction, either COMMIT or ROLLBACK and retry postgres=# Thank you, Rahila Syed
psql_error_on_autocommit_v1.patch
Description: application/download
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
