On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:49 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> writes:
> > On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 at 14:10, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> Under what circumstances would it be appropriate for a script to take
> >> it on itself to decide that? It has no way of knowing what the next -f
> >> option is or what the user intended.
>
> > Presumably when they're written by the same person so the script does
> > effectively know what the "user" intended because it's written by the
> > same user.
>
> Even so, embedding that knowledge in the first script doesn't seem
> like the sort of design we ought to encourage. It'd be better if
> "don't run the next script if the first one fails" were directed
> by a command-line switch or the like. I also wonder exactly how
> this interacts with existing features like ON_ERROR_STOP.
>
vagrant@vagrant:~$ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/psql -v ON_ERROR_STOP=1 -f two.psql
-f three.psql postgres
psql:two.psql:1: ERROR: division by zero
vagrant@vagrant:~$ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/psql -f two.psql -f three.psql
postgres
psql:two.psql:1: ERROR: division by zero
?column?
----------
2
(1 row)
?column?
----------
3
(1 row)
David J.
