Re: Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink and postgres_fdw

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink and postgres_fdw
Date: 2016-12-21 17:49:01
Message-ID: 0267ff84-97a4-41d6-9405-03301c44074b@joeconway.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/21/2016 09:27 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
>> On 12/21/2016 08:49 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I propose that we should change that string to "could not obtain message
>>> string for error on connection "foo"", or something along that line.
>>>
>>> postgres_fdw has the same disease. It wouldn't have the notion of a named
>>> connection, but maybe we could insert the foreign server name instead.
>
>> Seems reasonable to me. I can work on it if you'd like. Do you think
>> this should be backpatched?
>
> If you have time for it, please do, I have lots on my plate already.

Ok, will do.

> I'd vote for back-patching; the benefits of a clearer error message
> are obvious, and it hardly seems likely that any existing applications
> are depending on this specific error string.

Agreed.

Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2016-12-21 17:58:52 Re: pg_background contrib module proposal
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2016-12-21 17:44:48 Re: [ patch ] pg_dump: new --custom-fetch-table and --custom-fetch-value parameters