Re: pl/python tracebacks

From: Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>
Cc: Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pl/python tracebacks
Date: 2011-02-12 03:12:08
Message-ID: AANLkTikjdPiAfdu6x68u0ahgDybTL9rtzP30mc8O854d@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 02:10, Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org> wrote:
> On 06/02/11 20:12, Jan Urbański wrote:
>> On 27/01/11 22:58, Jan Urbański wrote:
>>> On 23/12/10 14:56, Jan Urbański wrote:
>>>> Here's a patch implementing traceback support for PL/Python mentioned in
>>>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-12/msg01991.php. It's
>>>> an incremental patch on top of the plpython-refactor patch sent eariler.
>>>
>>> Updated to master.
>>
>> Updated to master again.
>
> Once more.

In PLy_traceback fname and prname look like they will leak (well as
much as a palloc() in an error path can leak I suppose). Other than
that everything looks good. I tested plpython2 and plpython3 and
skimmed the docs to see if there was anything obvious that needed
updating. I also obviously looked at the added regression tests and
made sure they worked.

Marking as Ready.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-02-12 03:29:36 Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3
Previous Message Itagaki Takahiro 2011-02-12 02:15:11 Re: multiset patch review