Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add traceback information to PL/Python errors
Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org>
From: Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-04-07T22:39:40Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Add traceback information to PL/Python errors
- 2bd78eb8d51c 9.1.0 cited
Attachments
- plpython-traceback-sloppiness.patch (text/x-patch) patch
On 08/04/11 00:25, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org> wrote: >> On 07/04/11 23:01, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: >>>> Add traceback information to PL/Python errors >>>> >>>> This mimics the traceback information the Python interpreter prints >>>> with exceptions. >>>> >>>> Jan Urbański >>> >>> On my system this spits out a warning: >>> >>> plpython.c: In function ‘PLy_traceback’: >>> plpython.c:4487: warning: ‘s’ may be used uninitialized in this function >>> plpython.c:4487: note: ‘s’ was declared here >>> >>> That appears to be a live bug, unless it's guaranteed that lineno will >>> always be > 0. >> >> lineno should be > 0, unless Python is trying to tell us that the code >> frame originates from before the function. >> >>> Also, the loop test should really be written as current < lineno, >>> rather than current != lineno, just in case we should manage to pass a >>> lineno < 0, which with the current code would go into the tank and >>> spin. >> >> Yeah, good point. >> >>> This part looks pretty sketchy, too: >>> >>> while (s && isspace((unsigned char) *s)) >>> s++; >>> >>> Perhaps we meant to test *s here. It's hard to believe that we're >>> really intending to test whether the pointer has fallen off the end of >>> the address space and wrapped around to NULL. >> >> Gah, so short a function and so many things that I managed to get wrong. > > Patch? Attached. >> There's also this: >> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-04/msg00334.php > > Yep. I am assuming Peter will look at that one. I guess so. This only fixes the things you noticed. Jan