At Fri, 16 Sep 2022 15:55:33 +0900, bt22nakamorit <bt22nakamorit@oss.nttdata.com> wrote in
> Hi,
>
> """\set ON_ERROR_STOP on""" stops any subsequent incoming query that
> comes after an error of an SQL, but does not stop after a shell script
> ran by """\! <some command>""" returning values other than 0, -1, or
> 127, which suggests a failure in the result of the shell script.
>
> For example, suppose that below is an SQL file.
> \set ON_ERROR_STOP on
> SELECT 1;
> \! false
> SELECT 2;
>
> The current design allows SELECT 2 even though the shell script
> returns a value indicating a failure.
Since the "false" command did not "error out"?
> I thought that this action is rather unexpected since, based on the
> word """ON_ERROR_STOP""", ones may expect that failures of shell
> scripts should halt the incoming instructions as well.
> One clear solution is to let failures of shell script stop incoming
> queries just like how errors of SQLs do currently. Thoughts?
I'm not sure we want to regard any exit status from a succssful run as
a failure.
On the other hand, the proposed behavior seems useful to me.
So +1 from me to the proposal, assuming the corresponding edit of the
documentation happens.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
