Re: Thread-unsafe coding in ecpg - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Thread-unsafe coding in ecpg
Date
Msg-id 18693.1548302004@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Thread-unsafe coding in ecpg  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Thread-unsafe coding in ecpg  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Thread-unsafe coding in ecpg  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: Thread-unsafe coding in ecpg  (Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> This suggests that, rather than throwing up our hands if the initial
> _configthreadlocale call returns -1, we should act as though the function
> doesn't exist, and just soldier on the same as before.  The code in there
> assumes that -1 is a can't-happen case and doesn't try to recover,
> but apparently that's over-optimistic.

I pushed a patch to fix that.

It looks to me like the reason that the ecpg tests went into an infinite
loop is that compat_informix/test_informix.pgc has not considered the
possibility of repeated statement failures:

    while (1)
    {
        $fetch forward c into :i, :j, :c;
        if (sqlca.sqlcode == 100) break;
        else if (sqlca.sqlcode != 0) printf ("Error: %ld\n", sqlca.sqlcode);

        if (risnull(CDECIMALTYPE, (char *)&j))
            printf("%d NULL\n", i);
        else
        {
            int a;

            dectoint(&j, &a);
            printf("%d %d \"%s\"\n", i, a, c);
        }
    }


I know zip about ecpg coding practices, but wouldn't it be a better idea
to break out of the loop on seeing an error?

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Avoid creation of the free space map for small tables
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: inherited primary key misbehavior