Re: message clarifications

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: message clarifications
Date: 2010-04-06 14:11:56
Message-ID: 1270563116.24910.6160.camel@ebony
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 09:57 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > On tis, 2010-04-06 at 10:30 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> These are all DEBUG messages. Can you explain "marked differently" so I
> >> can do that for you?
>
> > Then it would be better to convert them to use elog() instead of
> > ereport().
>
> Or use errmsg_internal instead of errmsg.

I've changed them to elog() before you said this. Would you like me to
change them to errmsg_internal or do you mean "...as an option in the
future"?

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-04-06 14:13:48 Re: message clarifications
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-04-06 14:11:08 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Check compulsory parameters in recovery.conf in standby_mode, per