On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> One possibility is to break it down like this:
>> ERROR: foo is a sequence
>> DETAIL: Triggers can only be used on tables and views.
>> This could still be emitted by a function such as you suggest, and
>> indeed that would be the most practical way from both a consistency
>> and code-size standpoint.
> Great idea. I should have thought of that.
On further reflection, this can still turn into a laundry list in certain cases.
DETAIL: You can only comment on columns of tables, views, and composite types.
seems less helpful than:
DETAIL: Comments on relations with system-generated column names are
I think that for rules, triggers, constraints, and anything that only
works on a single relkind, we can't do much better than to list the
specific object types. But where there's some sort of guiding
principle involved I think we'd do well to articulate it.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tomas Vondra||Date: 2010-12-30 19:38:03|
|Subject: Re: estimating # of distinct values|
|Previous:||From: Chris Browne||Date: 2010-12-30 19:27:07|
|Subject: Re: C++ keywords in headers|