Pl Sql Exit Procedure Error
Contents |
here for a quick overview of the site Help Center Detailed answers to any questions you might have Meta Discuss the workings and policies of this site About Us Learn more about Stack Overflow the company Business Learn more about hiring developers or posting pl sql exception handling examples ads with us Stack Overflow Questions Jobs Documentation Tags Users Badges Ask Question x Dismiss Join the pl sql continue after exception Stack Overflow Community Stack Overflow is a community of 6.2 million programmers, just like you, helping each other. Join them; it only takes a minute: pl sql exception handling best practices Sign up Abort a PL/SQL program up vote 7 down vote favorite How do I get a PL/SQL program to end halfway through? I haven't been able to find any way to gracefully end the program if an exception occurs -
Pl Sql Return
if I handle it, it loops back into the code. Basically what I want to do is force the app not to run in certain conditions. So, I want to add something like this to the top of the program: BEGIN IF [condition] EXIT END IF [the rest of the program] END The suggested way is to throw an exception, but the block may well be an inner block - so the program outside of the block just keeps going. oracle plsql oracle raise exception with message share|improve this question edited May 21 '09 at 5:35 asked May 21 '09 at 5:06 Margaret 1,501113756 Are you asking how to get out of PL/SQL BEGIN-END block in the middle? –Vitaly Polonetsky May 21 '09 at 5:18 add a comment| 5 Answers 5 active oldest votes up vote 21 down vote accepted You can use RETURN MWATSON@> set serveroutput on MWATSON@> !cat test.sql BEGIN IF 1 = 1 THEN DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('ABOUT TO EXIT'); RETURN; END IF; DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('DID NOT EXIT'); END; MWATSON@> @test 8 / ABOUT TO EXIT PL/SQL procedure successfully completed. MWATSON@> share|improve this answer answered May 21 '09 at 5:50 Matthew Watson 9,43864675 add a comment| up vote 4 down vote I know it's too late to respond, but I have one more way that is not mentioned in the previous answers. Use RAISE_APPLICATION_ERROR and catch this exception in EXCEPTION section. As this rolls back uncommitted transactions, make sure to commit them explicitly if required. This way you can gracefully return from the program, instead of doing exception handling in IF block when you use RETURN. I used this for reference. http://www.plsql-tutorial.com/plsql-exception-handling.htm share|improve this answer edited Jun 20 '13 at 21:20 answered Apr 18 '13 at 14:22 KLeonine 11218 add a comment| up vote 2 down vote If you raise an exception that the block does not handle, the exception is always raised to the caller. So the easiest way to stop processing is raise an exception that is not handled anywhere in
shot at without result. —Winston Churchill Run-time errors arise from design faults, coding mistakes, hardware failures, and many other sources. Although functions for error trapping are contained in which section of a pl/sql block you cannot anticipate all possible errors, you can plan to handle
Pl/sql Raises An Exception In Which Two Of The Following Cases
certain kinds of errors meaningful to your PL/SQL program. With many programming languages, unless you disable error
Pl Sql Stop Execution
checking, a run-time error such as stack overflow or division by zero stops normal processing and returns control to the operating system. With PL/SQL, a mechanism called exception http://stackoverflow.com/questions/891458/abort-a-pl-sql-program handling lets you "bulletproof" your program so that it can continue operating in the presence of errors. This chapter contains these topics: Overview of PL/SQL Runtime Error Handling Advantages of PL/SQL Exceptions Summary of Predefined PL/SQL Exceptions Defining Your Own PL/SQL Exceptions How PL/SQL Exceptions Are Raised How PL/SQL Exceptions Propagate Reraising a PL/SQL Exception Handling Raised https://docs.oracle.com/cd/B13789_01/appdev.101/b10807/07_errs.htm PL/SQL Exceptions Tips for Handling PL/SQL Errors Overview of PL/SQL Compile-Time Warnings Overview of PL/SQL Runtime Error Handling In PL/SQL, an error condition is called an exception. Exceptions can be internally defined (by the runtime system) or user defined. Examples of internally defined exceptions include division by zero and out of memory. Some common internal exceptions have predefined names, such as ZERO_DIVIDE and STORAGE_ERROR. The other internal exceptions can be given names. You can define exceptions of your own in the declarative part of any PL/SQL block, subprogram, or package. For example, you might define an exception named insufficient_funds to flag overdrawn bank accounts. Unlike internal exceptions, user-defined exceptions must be given names. When an error occurs, an exception is raised. That is, normal execution stops and control transfers to the exception-handling part of your PL/SQL block or subprogram. Internal exceptions are raised implicitly (automatically) by the run-time system. User-defined exceptions must be raised explicitly by RAISE statements, which can also raise predefined exceptions. To handle raised exce
July 2008 Oracle Magazine Online 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 As Published In July/August 2008 DEVELOPER: PL/SQL Practices On Exceptions and Rules By Steven Feuerstein Best practices for where, when, and how to handle exceptions I http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/issue-archive/2008/08-jul/o48plsql-101224.html recently learned that if an exception is raised in the declaration section of my block, that block's exception section cannot handle the exception. That doesn't seem right. Why does PL/SQL work this way, and what https://mikesmithers.wordpress.com/2010/02/10/return-in-a-plsql-procedure-%E2%80%93-just-one-more-thing-mum-never-told-me/ does it mean for my coding practices? If an exception is raised in the declaration section of your block, that exception will propagate out of the block unhandled. PL/SQL behaves like this (or, to be pl sql more accurate, the Oracle PL/SQL development team decided to implement exception handling like this) because until local variables and constants are fully elaborated, you don't have a viable subprogram with which to work. Suppose the declaration-raised exception were handled inside that subprogram. To what could you refer inside the exception handler? You couldn't be sure that any of your local variables were initialized. The key question is: How does this behavior pl sql exception affect the way we should write our code? Before answering this question, let's explore when we are likely to encounter this issue. Exceptions in the declaration section occur when you try to initialize a variable declared in that section in a way that raises an exception. The most common exception raised surely must be ORA-06502 or VALUE_ERROR, which occurs (to name just two scenarios) when you try to assign a string value that is too large for the variable and when you try to assign a non-numeric value to a number. For example DECLARE l_name VARCHAR2(5) := 'STEVEN'; l_age NUMBER := '49 Years Old'; BEGIN This same rule for exceptions applies to initializing variables declared in a package (outside of any subprogram). If an exception occurs when you try to initialize a package-level variable, that exception will propagate unhandled out of the package, even if the initialization section contains an exception section. In such a situation, the PL/SQL runtime engine still registers the package as initialized and allows you to continue to reference subprograms and variables in the package. To understand this, consider this sequence of steps and PL/SQL statements: 1. I've compiled a package, valerr, that assigns a too-large value to a package-level string. The package body inclu
on February 10, 2010 by mikesmithers Functions return values. Procedures pass out parameters. That's the way it is, that's the way it's always been. Or that's what I thought up until recently. Turns out that procedures can return too. I don't know why I hadn't realised this before. Maybe I'm just too set in my ways, or maybe it's not just me. Yes, I hear you cry, but RETURN in a procedure won't pass back a value, so why would it be useful ? Time for another trivial example… We've got a procedure that always gets called as part of some processing or other, but only performs an update under certain conditions… CREATE TABLE trivial ( letter VARCHAR2(1)) / CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE ins_trivial( pa_input IN VARCHAR2) AS BEGIN IF ASCII( UPPER( pa_input)) BETWEEN 65 AND 90 THEN INSERT INTO trivial( letter) VALUES( pa_input); END IF; END; / So far, so what. OK, imagine that the procedure does the test and then does a whole load of other processing before finally finishing several hundred lines later. The END IF is way down at the bottom of the program. You've got to read all the way down to find out what happens if the input isn't a character ( i.e. absolutely nothing). Wouldn't it be much more readable if you knew that at the start ? Well, we could reverse the logic of the test and then raise an exception : CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE ins_trivial( pa_input IN VARCHAR2) AS e_no_error EXCEPTION; BEGIN IF ASCII( UPPER( pa_input)) NOT BETWEEN 65 AND 90 THEN RAISE e_no_error; END IF; INSERT INTO trivial( letter) VALUES( pa_input); EXCEPTION WHEN e_no_error THEN NULL; END; / That's OK, but it's a bit misleading – we're raising an exception but it's not because of an error. How about CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE ins_trivial( pa_input IN VARCHAR2) AS BEGIN IF ASCII( UPPER( pa_input)) NOT BETWEEN 65 AND 90 THEN GOTO no_action; END IF; INSERT INTO trivial( letter) VALUES( pa_input); <