ew patch! I think Nagata-san's v10 patch is a clear
improvement over my v9 patch. I'm happy with the changes.
>> Also, let me ask one question. In this case, I directly modified your commit
>> in
>> the v8-0003 patch. Is that the right way to update the patch?
>
> I’m not sure if that’s the best way, but I think modifying the patch directly
> is a
> valid way to propose an alternative approach during discussion, as long as
> the original
> patch is respected. It can often help clarify suggestions.
I understand that. Thank you.
Regards,
Rintaro Ikeda
ectly modified your commit in
the v8-0003 patch. Is that the right way to update the patch?
Regards,
Rintaro IkedaFrom 202e24cfad77763bf4da2f3023845223adb60e2c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Rintaro Ikeda
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2025 23:36:37 +0900
Subject: [PATCH v9 1/3] Add --continue-on-error option
Hi,
On 2025/07/10 18:17, Yugo Nagata wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 23:58:32 +0900
> Rintaro Ikeda wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thank you for the kind comments.
>>
>> I've updated the previous patch.
>
> Thank you for updating the patch!
>
>&
gt; to the beginning of the statements; like
>
> "By default, if execution of an SQL or meta command fails for reasons other
> than
> serialization or deadlock errors, the client is aborted."
>
> How about quoting "other failures"? like:
>
> "These cases
>stats.retried;
stats.serialization_failures +=
thread->stats.serialization_failures;
stats.deadlock_failures += thread->stats.deadlock_failures;
+ stats.other_sql_failures += thread->stats.other_sql_failures;
