"anarazel(at)anarazel(dot)de" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> schrieb:
>> The people who are content to do that don't need this patch at all.
>> They can just apply a regexp to the message that comes back from the
>> server and then set constraint_name based on what pops out of the
>> regex. And then do just what you did there.
> Easier said than done if you're dealing with pg installations with different lc_messages...
Exactly. To my mind, the *entire* point of this patch is to remove the
need for people to try to dig information out of potentially-localized
message strings. It's not clear to me that we have to strain to provide
information that isn't in the currently-reported messages --- we are
only trying to make it easier for client-side code to extract the
information it's likely to need.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2013-01-04 18:07:37|
|Subject: Re: Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation
|Previous:||From: Boszormenyi Zoltan||Date: 2013-01-04 17:36:43|
|Subject: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed
via SQL [review]|