Re: [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure
Date: 2003-03-18 14:50:01
Message-ID: 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B8259DDA@mail.vale-housing.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: 18 March 2003 14:45
> To: Peter Eisentraut
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org; pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's
> error-message infrastructure
>
>
> I think this is a matter to be solved at the level of the API
> of each client library. For example, libpq's PQerrorMessage
> would presumably construct some unified string out of these
> three fields and the error severity; plus we'd add new calls
> to extract the individual fields. I do not think it's
> appropriate to try to control this from the server side of things.

I agree. It's trivial for ODBC/JDBC etc to concatenate a few strings,
and the flexibility gained by interfaces such as libpq that don't have a
spec to follow would be very welcome (here at least!).

Regards, Dave.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-03-18 14:51:07 Re: Red Hat snubbed by Oracle
Previous Message Ricardo Ryoiti S. Junior 2003-03-18 14:48:59 Re: Red Hat snubbed by Oracle

Browse pgsql-interfaces by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2003-03-18 22:03:26 Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-03-18 14:44:32 Re: [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure