Re: Do we need "Diagnostics" sections of SQL command reference pages?

On 26 Aug 2003 at 9:37, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Dan Langille" <dan(at)langille(dot)org> writes:
> > On 26 Aug 2003 at 9:14, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/sql-createdatabase.html
>
> > The value I see in those message is it gives the reader more
> > information about what can go wrong. The above example shows that
> > you cannot use "create database" within a transaction.
>
> Sure, but that should have been stated in the command description.

Agreed. If the command description contains enough information, the
DIAGNOSTICS section is no longer needed.

> > Also, the information under "ERROR: Could not initialize database
> > directory." is pretty good.
>
> I chose this example deliberately, because it's one of very few pages
> where there's actually nontrivial content in the Diagnostics section.
> "could not initialize database directory" seems to me the only one
> of these messages that requires more info (the "could not create
> database directory" message now includes the kernel error code, so
> it's sufficiently improved IMHO). What I'm inclined to do about it
> is add a DETAIL field showing the exact "cp" command that failed, and
> perhaps a HINT suggesting that people look in the postmaster's stderr
> log to see cp's complaint. Not sure how to translate that to Windows,
> but under Unix it should be sufficient no?

For me, yes. I do like the idea of a DETAIL field. The more info
the better. The HINT would be nice to have.
--
Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/