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

Re: Do we need "Diagnostics" sections of SQL command reference pages?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Do we need "Diagnostics" sections of SQL command reference pages?
Date: 2003-09-03 20:06:14
Message-ID: 200309031306.14405.josh@agliodbs.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
Tom,

> I'm starting to look at updating the docs to match 7.4 error message
> spellings.  I find that a large part of the work I'll have to do is in
> updating the "Diagnostics" (formerly "Outputs") section of the command
> reference pages.  I am wondering if it wouldn't be better to just rip
> out these sections entirely.  They seem like nearly content-free fluff
> to me --- the listings of possible error messages are always incomplete,
> often out of date, and arguably useless.  If there is an error message
> that's not clear enough by itself, we'd better fix the error message
> instead of putting a gloss on it in the reference page.
> 
> Comments?

I agree that we don't need descriptions of the meaning of each error message 
in the command documentation.

However, the listing of potential error messages is *very* useful to 
application coders for doing automated handling of errors.   Since we are now 
supporting SQLSTATE responses, perhaps we could have error code ranges for 
the commands?     Or is that totally unreasonable?


-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco


In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-09-03 20:29:12
Subject: Re: [DOCS] German FAQ update
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2003-09-03 19:19:23
Subject: Re: Automatic documentation spell check

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