fix(open_table): keep traceback in open_table#7854
Merged
cpwright merged 1 commit intodeephaven:mainfrom Apr 6, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
No docs changes detected for c0df5f0 |
Contributor
|
All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅ |
Contributor
Author
|
Recheck |
Contributor
Thanks for submitting the PR. It looks good to me. Could you sign the CLA so we can get a clean check? |
Contributor
Author
|
I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA. |
deephaven-internal
added a commit
to deephaven/cla
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 6, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Spotted something in py/client/pydeephaven/session.py that might be worth a look: It re-raises the caught exception object and loses the cleaner traceback shape. this patch changes that to a plain raise so the original stack stays intact — happy to close if this isn’t useful.
Happy to revise the approach or close this if it doesn’t fit — you know the codebase far better than I do.