"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> To reiterate my opinion, I think the behavior should be the same
> for interactive and non-interactive sessions. Not only will it
> prevent nasty surprises, but unless we make a third 'setting',
> there will be no way to enable this in non-interactive scripts,
> which is something that I would want to be able to do.

I'm finding it hard to visualize a non-interactive script making
any good use of such a setting.  Without a way to test whether
you got an error or not, it would amount to an "ignore errors
within transactions" mode, which seems a pretty bad idea.

Can you show a plausible use-case for such a thing?

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to