Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] message for constraint

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] message for constraint
Date: 2006-01-16 21:04:58
Message-ID: 18049.1137445498@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> ok... maybe notice? log? i suppose that the ERROR  line is error level
> so the idea is lowering the context so i can put
> client_min_messages='error' and see just what the user can
> understand...

If you don't want to show the context field, build your own error
message from the other fields.  libpq provides adequate support for
that.  I'm not sure what the state of play is in JDBC or other APIs,
but if you need this you should be lobbying the client-side library
authors to change, not the backend.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2006-01-16 21:08:19
Subject: Re: Anyone see a need for BTItem/HashItem?
Previous:From: Jonah H. HarrisDate: 2006-01-16 21:02:37
Subject: Re: Anyone see a need for BTItem/HashItem?

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Benjamin WraggDate: 2006-01-17 00:58:24
Subject: ISBN-13 support
Previous:From: Jaime CasanovaDate: 2006-01-16 20:59:45
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] message for constraint

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group