Re: patch for 9.2: enhanced errors

From: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
To: Steve Singer <ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: patch for 9.2: enhanced errors
Date: 2011-06-19 11:43:43
Message-ID: 84C582F2-944E-4B68-ABFA-5F6D9A122DE4@phlo.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Jun19, 2011, at 05:10 , Steve Singer wrote:
> On 11-06-18 06:36 PM, Steve Singer wrote:
>> On 11-06-08 04:14 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>
>> Here is my review of this patch
>>
>> Submission Review:
>> ------------------------
>> The patch applies cleanly against master
>> The patch does not include any documentation updates (see note below to update config.sgml)
>> The patch does not include any unit tests. At a minimum it should add a few tests with verbosity set to verbose
>>
>
> On second thought tests might not work. Is the only way to get the constraint details are in verbose mode where line numbers from the c file are also included? If so then this won't work for the regression tests. Having the diff comparison fail every time someone makes an unrelated change to a source file isn't what we want.

Speaking as someone who's wished for the feature that Pavel's patch provides
many times in the past - shouldn't there also be a field containing the
offending value? If we had that, it'd finally be possible to translate
constraint-related error messages to informative messages for the user.

best regards,
Florian Pflug

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2011-06-19 12:00:40 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Don't use "cp -i" in the example WAL archive_command.
Previous Message Kohei KaiGai 2011-06-19 11:40:28 Re: [v9.2] DROP Reworks Part.0 - 'missing_ok' support of get_object_address