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

Re: Policy on schema-qualified names

From: Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>
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: Policy on schema-qualified names
Date: 2006-01-31 18:29:36
Message-ID: 20060131182936.GA2873@mcknight.de (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 05:10:03PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Joachim Wieland wrote:
> >> I wonder if there is a policy on when schema-qualified names should
> >> be used in ereport/elog messages.

> > If it's not too hard to do, I would add the schema name in most places.

> Actually, it's semi-consciously omitted in most places on the grounds
> that (1) it's seldom necessary to identify the problem, and (2) in many
> error messages it would contribute to violating the "make it fit on one
> line" style guideline.

(1) is probably true but it wouldn't hurt to include the schema name there
either.

Making assumptions on the length of an error message seems to be moot
anyway, since you don't know the length of the names of user defined objects
in advance, nor do you know the length of the translated message strings in
different languages.
So you just lose precision for a questionable gain.



Joachim


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-01-31 18:46:42
Subject: Re: Policy on schema-qualified names
Previous:From: Jay JayDate: 2006-01-31 17:07:02
Subject: Vacuum and Hash Tables

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