Re: Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP?
Date
Msg-id 603c8f070907250615u2c728f46y18ddfc5cc25314cd@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP?  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Magnus Hagander<magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> On Saturday, July 25, 2009, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>> When you run a file with psql -1/--single-transaction, and a command fails,
>> you get bombarded with
>>
>> ERROR:  current transaction is aborted, commands ignored until end of
>> transaction block
>>
>> for the rest of the file.
>>
>
> That would certainly be useful.
>
> Personally I'd prefer it to default to that always, and not just in
> -1, but that would break way too many old things I'm afraid...

Doing it always would be really annoying.  I often reload dumps that
fail the grant statements but otherwise work.  Admittedly, if I
planned ahead, I could avoid having the grants be present in the
dumps, but that would require planning ahead...

But +1 for doing it when -1 is used.

...Robert


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: Shouldn't psql -1 imply ON_ERROR_STOP?
Next
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal: support empty string as separator for string_to_array