From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: New error code to track unsupported contexts |
Date: | 2015-04-08 01:21:27 |
Message-ID: | 20150408012127.GQ4369@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 11/28/14 11:41 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >When pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects is run in a context that is not
> >the one of an event trigger, currently the error code
> >ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED is returned. Wouldn't it be better to
> >have an error to define an out-of-context instead? It seems that it
> >would be a good thing to have more error verbosity for situations like
> >the case above. Note that this idea has been mentioned on this ML a
> >couple of weeks back. In any case, attached is a patch showing the
> >idea.
> >
> >Opinions? Is that worth having?
>
> Anything ever happen with this? (FWIW, I'm in favor of it. Reporting the
> feature isn't supported is confusing...)
Not opposed to the idea.
Maybe it should be in class 39 'External Routine Invocation Exception'
instead, like ERRCODE_E_R_I_E_TRIGGER_PROTOCOL_VIOLATED is used by
various trigger functions. We could invent
ERRCODE_E_R_I_E_EVENT_TRIGGER_PROTOCOL_VIOLATED with value 39P03, for
example.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2015-04-08 01:28:39 | Re: pg_regress writes into source tree |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-04-08 01:15:32 | Re: Doubt about AccessExclusiveLock in ALTER TABLE .. SET ( .. ); |