From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Identifying function-lookup failures due to argument name mismatches |
Date: | 2025-08-14 19:18:51 |
Message-ID: | 468738.1755199131@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Another thing not to like is that it seems like this is doing violence
> to several APIs in exchange for not very much improvement in the error
> messages. I feel like maybe we ought to be trying for more
> specificity about additional cases, but I'm not very sure what else
> to improve or what the API could look like.
I couldn't quite let go of this, and after some thought I hit on the
idea of making FuncnameGetCandidates pass back a bitmask of flags
showing how far the match succeeded. This seems to work pretty
nicely, allowing quite-detailed reports with only minimal added
overhead or code restructuring. There's probably room for further
improvement, but it has less of a whiff of "quick single-purpose
hack". See draft commit message for more details.
regards, tom lane
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-Provide-more-specific-error-hints-for-function-lo.patch | text/x-diff | 34.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matheus Alcantara | 2025-08-14 19:22:49 | Re: Eager aggregation, take 3 |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2025-08-14 19:15:02 | Re: index prefetching |