| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
of the previous monolithic setup-create-run sequence, that was apparently
inherited from a previous test infrastructure, but makes working with the
tests and adding new ones weird.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
for its arguments. Also add a regression test, since someone apparently
changed every single plpython test case to use only named parameters; else
we'd have noticed this sooner.
Euler Taveira de Oliveira, per a report from Alvaro
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
support multiple OUT arguments, though.)
Hannu Krosing
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Sven Suursoho
|
| |
|
|
| |
this works.
|
| |
|
|
| |
regression test.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
(I didn't use his patch, however). A void-returning PL/Python function
must return None (from Python), which is translated into a void datum
(and *not* NULL) for Postgres. I also added some regression tests for
this functionality.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
when a plpython function returns unicode" thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-06/msg00105.php
In several places PL/Python was calling PyObject_Str() and then
PyString_AsString() without checking if the former had returned
NULL to indicate an error. PyString_AsString() doesn't expect a
NULL argument, so passing one causes a segmentation fault. This
patch adds checks for NULL and raises errors via PLy_elog(), which
prints details of the underlying Python exception. The patch also
adds regression tests for these checks. All tests pass on my
Solaris 9 box running HEAD and Python 2.4.1.
In one place the patch doesn't call PLy_elog() because that could
cause infinite recursion; see the comment I added. I'm not sure
how to test that particular case or whether it's even possible to
get an error there: the value that the code should check is the
Python exception type, so I wonder if a NULL value "shouldn't
happen." This patch converts NULL to "Unknown Exception" but I
wonder if an Assert() would be appropriate.
The patch is against HEAD but the same changes should be applied
to earlier versions because they have the same problem. The patch
might not apply cleanly against earlier versions -- will the committer
take care of little differences or should I submit different versions
of the patch?
Michael Fuhr
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
*fail*, to test that plpython didn't allow untrusted operations.
When we changed plpython to plpythonu because python didn't actually have
a secure sandbox mode, someone (probably me :-() misinterpreted the tests
as checking whether Python's file I/O works. Which is a stupid thing for
us to be testing. Remove it so we don't clutter the filesystem with
random temporary files.
|
|
|
PLs to use the standard pg_regress infrastructure. No changes in the
tests themselves. Andrew Dunstan
|
