| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure |
| Date: | 2003-03-18 14:35:38 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0303181520350.2003-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
Tom Lane writes:
> Hmm. I can't see any advantage to these over assigning our own codes;
> ours would have at least *some* mnemonic value, rather than being chosen
> completely at random ...
One advantage is that interfaces that are required to use these constants
would not need an internal translation table.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-03-18 14:36:03 | Re: [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-03-18 14:34:53 | Re: analyze after a database restore? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-03-18 14:36:03 | Re: [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2003-03-18 03:40:18 | Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign |