> The only thing I’m cautious about is treating “pset.db is NULL/invalid” as just another “quoting failure” case. In
thiscompletion branch we call PQescapeLiteral(pset.db, ...) before we ever reach exec_query(), so an explicit guard is
aboutavoiding passing an unusable handle into libpq in the first place. Even if libpq were to return NULL in that
situation,it’s > not something I’d want to rely on implicitly.
> That’s why I suggested the explicit guard: it matches the general psql style of checking !pset.db before calling
libpqAPIs (e.g. psql_get_variable() in src/bin/psql/common.c checks !pset.db before calling PQescapeLiteral()), and it
makesthe intent obviously safe. Behavior-wise it’s the same (fall back to ALL), just more defensive/clear & explicit.
Hi,
Okay, I understand what you mean, thank you.
--
Regards,
Man Zeng
www.openhalo.org
