From: | Nikhil Sontakke <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: xml_is_document and selective pg_re_throw |
Date: | 2012-06-13 06:57:02 |
Message-ID: | CANgU5ZcsxWpEixWiMZc6nNN7QEJ01e1qv9G8qNSJKQzwgMZ5VA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> No, I don't see any particular risk there. The places that might throw
> ERRCODE_INVALID_XML_DOCUMENT are sufficiently few (as in, exactly one,
> in this usage) that we can have reasonable confidence we know what the
> system state is when we catch that error.
>
>
Hmmm, I was writing some code in which I happened to hold a LWLock when
this function was called. The first catch/rethrow cleaned up the
InterruptHoldoffCount value. A subsequent release of that LWLock tripped up
the (Assert(InterruptHoldoffCount > 0);) inside RESUME_INTERRUPTS().
I know holding an lwlock like this might not be a good idea, but this
behavior just got me thinking about other probable issues.
Regards,
Nikhils
> > A better way would have been to modify xml_parse to take an additional
> > boolean argument "to_rethrow" and not to rethrow if that is false?
>
> We could do that, but it would greatly complicate xml_parse IMO, since
> it still needs its own PG_TRY block to handle other error cases, and
> only one of those error cases ought to optionally return failure instead
> of re-throwing.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2012-06-13 07:11:55 | Re: Tab completion of function arguments not working in all cases |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-06-13 04:09:11 | Re: initdb and fsync |