| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: verbose mode for pg_input_error_message? |
| Date: | 2023-01-04 21:18:59 |
| Message-ID: | 4b418e31-f95a-1d3b-737e-93ba46cf4f8e@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2023-01-02 Mo 10:44, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> I've been wondering if it might be a good idea to have a third parameter
>> for pg_input_error_message() which would default to false, but which if
>> true would cause it to emit the detail and hint fields, if any, as well
>> as the message field from the error_data.
> I don't think that just concatenating those strings would make for a
> pleasant API. More sensible, perhaps, to have a separate function
> that returns a record. Or we could redefine the existing function
> that way, but I suspect that "just the primary error" will be a
> principal use-case.
>
> Being able to get the SQLSTATE is likely to be interesting too.
>
>
OK, here's a patch along those lines.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pg_input_error_detail.patch | text/x-patch | 8.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2023-01-04 21:26:39 | Re: Add a test to ldapbindpasswd |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-01-04 21:18:38 | Re: meson oddities |