Re: plperl error format vs plpgsql error format vs pgTAP

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kevin Field <kevinjamesfield(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: plperl error format vs plpgsql error format vs pgTAP
Date: 2009-05-29 17:04:04
Message-ID: 20611.1243616644@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kevin Field <kevinjamesfield(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> default:
> elog(ERROR, "unrecognized raise option: %d", opt->opt_type);

> Should this be changed to:

> default:
> ereport(ERROR, (errmsg_internal("unrecognized raise option: %d",
> opt->opt_type)));

No, we generally don't bother with that. The above two are exactly
equivalent and the first is easier to write, so why complicate the code?
ereport is needed if you want to specify a SQLSTATE, provide a
translatable error message, etc, but for internal shouldn't-happen cases
we customarily just use elog.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-05-29 17:30:36 Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f
Previous Message Aidan Van Dyk 2009-05-29 17:03:05 Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up