| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: the case for machine-readable error fields |
| Date: | 2009-08-04 21:50:28 |
| Message-ID: | 4A78AD24.2080505@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Hmm, well, I skipped the rationale because it has been requested before.
> For example, we need to give constraint names so that applications can
> tell which unique key is being violated. We need table names on which
> they are being violated. We need column names for datatype mismatches,
> and so on. We frequently see people parsing the error message to
> extract those, but that is known to be fragile, cumbersome and error
> prone.
If that's what we're trying to solve, I don't think that adding some
kind of proprietary shorthand coding is a good idea. If we're do to
this at all, it should be a connection-based GUC option, and use some
standard formal like XML fragments.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
www.pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-08-04 21:55:32 | Re: head contrib is broken (crypto) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-08-04 21:45:42 | Re: the case for machine-readable error fields |