Message407780
> I think this change is no problem.
Thanks, and thank you for looking reviewing this change.
> There is only one situation that a problem may occur. Write code with SQLite
> 3.8.7.2+ (2014-11-18), and run it on 3.7.15 (2012-12-12) ~ 3.8.7.1-, but
> this situation may be difficult to happen, we can note this situation in
> doc.
How realistic is this scenario? If you compile with, for example 3.14.0 or newer, you'd link with sqlite3_trace_v2, not sqlite3_trace, so the loader would prevent you from running with anything pre 3.14. AFAIK, we've never had such problems.
> More securely, if run on SQLite 3.8.7.1-, and encounter
> SQLITE_ABORT_ROLLBACK error code, a prompt can be given to explain the
> reason.
You already get both an error message, an (extended) error code. That should be sufficient.
> Also note that the current main branch is buggy. If don't adopt this change
> or revert this change later, don't forget to fix the bug of msg407185
> (`pysqlite_Statement.in_use` flag is not reset).
It is a change of behaviour of the internal machinery. Does the change lead to wrong results (duplicate rows, wrong rows returned, no rows returned)? Corrupted/garbage data? Non-deterministic behaviour? Does any of the API's provided by sqlite3 not behave according to the documentation anymore?
NB: I plan to get rid of the in_use flag long before the beta sets in. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2021-12-06 10:13:34 | erlendaasland | set | recipients:
+ erlendaasland, lemburg, berker.peksag, serhiy.storchaka, malin |
2021-12-06 10:13:34 | erlendaasland | set | messageid: <1638785614.27.0.298647506409.issue44092@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
2021-12-06 10:13:34 | erlendaasland | link | issue44092 messages |
2021-12-06 10:13:34 | erlendaasland | create | |
|