Move SPI error reporting out of ri_ReportViolation()
These are two completely unrelated code paths, so it doesn't make sense to pack them into one function. Add attribute noreturn to ri_ReportViolation(). Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
9eafa2b5b0
commit
582bbcf37f
@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ static void ri_ExtractValues(Relation rel, HeapTuple tup,
|
||||
static void ri_ReportViolation(const RI_ConstraintInfo *riinfo,
|
||||
Relation pk_rel, Relation fk_rel,
|
||||
HeapTuple violator, TupleDesc tupdesc,
|
||||
int queryno, bool spi_err);
|
||||
int queryno) pg_attribute_noreturn();
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
/* ----------
|
||||
@ -2499,7 +2499,7 @@ RI_Initial_Check(Trigger *trigger, Relation fk_rel, Relation pk_rel)
|
||||
ri_ReportViolation(&fake_riinfo,
|
||||
pk_rel, fk_rel,
|
||||
tuple, tupdesc,
|
||||
RI_PLAN_CHECK_LOOKUPPK, false);
|
||||
RI_PLAN_CHECK_LOOKUPPK);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (SPI_finish() != SPI_OK_FINISH)
|
||||
@ -3147,11 +3147,13 @@ ri_PerformCheck(const RI_ConstraintInfo *riinfo,
|
||||
elog(ERROR, "SPI_execute_snapshot returned %d", spi_result);
|
||||
|
||||
if (expect_OK >= 0 && spi_result != expect_OK)
|
||||
ri_ReportViolation(riinfo,
|
||||
pk_rel, fk_rel,
|
||||
new_tuple ? new_tuple : old_tuple,
|
||||
NULL,
|
||||
qkey->constr_queryno, true);
|
||||
ereport(ERROR,
|
||||
(errcode(ERRCODE_INTERNAL_ERROR),
|
||||
errmsg("referential integrity query on \"%s\" from constraint \"%s\" on \"%s\" gave unexpected result",
|
||||
RelationGetRelationName(pk_rel),
|
||||
NameStr(riinfo->conname),
|
||||
RelationGetRelationName(fk_rel)),
|
||||
errhint("This is most likely due to a rule having rewritten the query.")));
|
||||
|
||||
/* XXX wouldn't it be clearer to do this part at the caller? */
|
||||
if (qkey->constr_queryno != RI_PLAN_CHECK_LOOKUPPK_FROM_PK &&
|
||||
@ -3161,7 +3163,7 @@ ri_PerformCheck(const RI_ConstraintInfo *riinfo,
|
||||
pk_rel, fk_rel,
|
||||
new_tuple ? new_tuple : old_tuple,
|
||||
NULL,
|
||||
qkey->constr_queryno, false);
|
||||
qkey->constr_queryno);
|
||||
|
||||
return SPI_processed != 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -3205,7 +3207,7 @@ static void
|
||||
ri_ReportViolation(const RI_ConstraintInfo *riinfo,
|
||||
Relation pk_rel, Relation fk_rel,
|
||||
HeapTuple violator, TupleDesc tupdesc,
|
||||
int queryno, bool spi_err)
|
||||
int queryno)
|
||||
{
|
||||
StringInfoData key_names;
|
||||
StringInfoData key_values;
|
||||
@ -3216,15 +3218,6 @@ ri_ReportViolation(const RI_ConstraintInfo *riinfo,
|
||||
AclResult aclresult;
|
||||
bool has_perm = true;
|
||||
|
||||
if (spi_err)
|
||||
ereport(ERROR,
|
||||
(errcode(ERRCODE_INTERNAL_ERROR),
|
||||
errmsg("referential integrity query on \"%s\" from constraint \"%s\" on \"%s\" gave unexpected result",
|
||||
RelationGetRelationName(pk_rel),
|
||||
NameStr(riinfo->conname),
|
||||
RelationGetRelationName(fk_rel)),
|
||||
errhint("This is most likely due to a rule having rewritten the query.")));
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Determine which relation to complain about. If tupdesc wasn't passed
|
||||
* by caller, assume the violator tuple came from there.
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user