At Fri, 16 Sep 2022 15:55:33 +0900, bt22nakamorit <bt22nakamo...@oss.nttdata.com> wrote in > Hi, > > """\set ON_ERROR_STOP on""" stops any subsequent incoming query that > comes after an error of an SQL, but does not stop after a shell script > ran by """\! <some command>""" returning values other than 0, -1, or > 127, which suggests a failure in the result of the shell script. > > For example, suppose that below is an SQL file. > \set ON_ERROR_STOP on > SELECT 1; > \! false > SELECT 2; > > The current design allows SELECT 2 even though the shell script > returns a value indicating a failure.
Since the "false" command did not "error out"? > I thought that this action is rather unexpected since, based on the > word """ON_ERROR_STOP""", ones may expect that failures of shell > scripts should halt the incoming instructions as well. > One clear solution is to let failures of shell script stop incoming > queries just like how errors of SQLs do currently. Thoughts? I'm not sure we want to regard any exit status from a succssful run as a failure. On the other hand, the proposed behavior seems useful to me. So +1 from me to the proposal, assuming the corresponding edit of the documentation happens. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
