On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 8:49 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> writes: > > I don't think we need additional PG_TRY() for that since exec_stmts() > > is already called in PG_TRY() if there is an exception block. I meant > > to call stmt_end() in PG_CATCH() in exec_stmt_block() (i.e. only when > > an error is caught by the exception block). Currently, if an error is > > caught, we call stmt_begin() and stmt_end() for statements executed > > inside the exception block but call only stmt_begin() for the > > statement that raised an error. > > I fail to see anything wrong with that. We never completed execution > of the statement that raised an error, but calling stmt_end for it > would imply that we did. I think changing this will break more things > than it fixes, completely independently of whatever cost it would add. > > Or in other words: the initial complaint describes a bug in pg_hint_plan, > not one in plpgsql. > > The OP suggests needing something akin to a "finally" callback for statement. While a fine feature request for plpgsql its absence doesn't constitute a bug.
David J.
