| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: enhanced error fields |
| Date: | 2012-12-30 04:21:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAEYLb_XBVDvutGkM+ymR_Lg8X=tHe6P3xF=rzaNdmhg8+NJ9Bw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 30 December 2012 03:32, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> Err. I intended to say "I really don't think what I sketched out, or
> something similar, would be that unlikely to happen", or something along
> those lines. Apologies for the confusion.
Almost anything can be misused.
If you're going to insist that I hack a bunch of mechanism into this
patch so that the user can unambiguously identify each constraint
object, I'll do that. However, that's more code, and more complexity,
that will have to be documented, for just next to no practical benefit
that I can see.
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-12-30 04:37:20 | Re: buffer assertion tripping under repeat pgbench load |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2012-12-30 04:13:47 | Re: Event Triggers: adding information |