Re: pg_croak, or something like it?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_croak, or something like it?
Date: 2020-01-27 15:56:02
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYjM-6Zikp5+xLaNM_AbqsxUE7V+0HMWjk6WFWdbFwoww@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:50 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> So? elog() is just a specific degenerate case of ereport(). If we have
> a way to implement ereport() on frontend side then we can surely do
> elog() too.

I suppose that's true.

> What it sounds to me like you want to do is implement (some equivalent of)
> elog() but not ereport() for this environment. I'm going to resist that
> pretty strongly, because I think it will lead directly to abuse of elog()
> for user-facing errors, with a consequent degradation of the user
> experience when that code executes on backend side. I do not believe
> that there are no user-facing error cases in the JSON parser, for
> example; much less that we'll never introduce any in future.

You clearly haven't read the thread on this topic, or at least not
very carefully.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-01-27 16:07:53 Re: pg_croak, or something like it?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2020-01-27 15:54:19 Re: Error message inconsistency