Re: Extended Statistics set/restore/clear functions.

From: Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Extended Statistics set/restore/clear functions.
Date: 2025-12-05 05:30:38
Message-ID: CADkLM=fnhZQzrRRB4ig5FvDfZ0trrYugLk2_R6qyzDPG4ESLpg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
>
> Some of them are, yes. However, they are also worded with the same
> format as some of the legit cases. So they don't add any extra
> workload on the translation side as far as I recall, and I've been
> fond of the errdetail part to get a consistent style across the board.
> I'll double-check the whole a bit later, attached is the rest of them.
>
> Corey, any comments about these?
>

The wordings are fine, and I'm sorry I didn't word them as complete
sentences from the get-go.

Attached is a follow-on to Michael's most recent uncommitted patch,
changing the errors that I see as "impossible" to elogs. However, I agree
that they don't add significant workload to the translations, and most
input functions need to avoid any hard error returns lest they be called in
a soft-error context.

Attachment Content-Type Size
v2-0002-Change-impossible-conditions-to-elogs.patch text/x-patch 2.3 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bryan Green 2025-12-05 05:45:16 Re: [PATCH] Allow complex data for GUC extra.
Previous Message Dilip Kumar 2025-12-05 05:16:44 Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication