On 11/16/11 23:13, Royce Ausburn wrote:
> The patch fails the regression tests because it is outputting new DETAIL
> line which four of tests aren't expecting. The tests will need to be
Hi Royce, thanks for your time which you've put into this review.
What is the suggested way to go form here? Shall I update the unit tests?
> One comment I have on the output is that strings are not in quotes.
> It's a little jarring, but might not be that big a deal. A contrived
> case that is pretty confusing:
> test=# insert into test select 1, 2, '3, 4', 4;
> ERROR: new row for relation "test" violates check constraint "test_b_check"
> DETAIL: Failing row: (1, 2, 3, 4, 4).
> A select inserting 4 columns seemingly results in a 5 column row ;)
Yes, I agree that the unescaped format of strings leads to ambiguous
results here. The code was copy-pasted from the checks which handle the
UNIQUE constraints, so if there's an obvious improvement, it should
probably be applied in there as well.
> Another super minor thing, postgres doesn't seem to put periods at the
> end of log messages, yet this new detail line does.
Again, I'm not familiar with the correct procedure. Shall I send a
revised patch for this one?
With kind regards,
Trojita, a fast e-mail client -- http://trojita.flaska.net/
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Pavel Stehule||Date: 2011-11-21 14:05:12|
|Subject: Re: ToDo: pg_backup - using a conditional DROP|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-11-21 13:18:19|
|Subject: Re: Singleton range constructors versus functional coercion notation|