Re: patch for 9.2: enhanced errors

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: patch for 9.2: enhanced errors
Date: 2011-07-19 02:33:49
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of lun jul 18 16:02:43 -0400 2011:
> 2011/7/18 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:

> > which suggests that it might be meant *only* for use with
> > INSUFFICIENT_PRIVILEGE errors that are thrown due to a column ACL.
> > We can probably extend that to some other syntax errors, like unknown
> > column or wrong datatype or what have you, but there is nothing here to
> > suggest that we have to force the issue for errors that don't naturally
> > relate to exactly one column.  And CHECK constraints don't.  Consider
> > "CHECK (f1 > f2)".
> ok, this is relative clean, but
> so for example, NULL or DOMAIN constraints doesn't affect a
> COLUMN_NAME? These constraints has no name.

I dunno about domains, but NOT NULL constraints definitely have names
according to the standard (and will have them in PG soon enough).

Hmm, domain constraints are CHECK or NOT NULL, and both of them have or
will have names.

Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2011-07-19 02:44:09 pgsql: Cascading replication feature for streaming log-based replicatio
Previous Message David Fetter 2011-07-19 02:30:52 Re: proposal: new contrib module plpgsql's embeded sql validator