| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "anarazel(at)anarazel(dot)de" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, 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: | 2013-01-04 22:33:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAEYLb_XNapUCCXiTLUsDSEzXopqX-t3OTae92m7ZjHr10jq=JA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4 January 2013 18:07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Exactly. To my mind, the *entire* point of this patch is to remove the
> need for people to try to dig information out of potentially-localized
> message strings. It's not clear to me that we have to strain to provide
> information that isn't in the currently-reported messages --- we are
> only trying to make it easier for client-side code to extract the
> information it's likely to need.
It seems that we're in agreement, then. I'll prepare a version of the
patch very similar to the one I previously posted, but with some
caveats about how reliably the values can be used. I think that that
should be fine.
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-01-04 22:37:50 | Re: enhanced error fields |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2013-01-04 22:11:18 | Re: dynamic SQL - possible performance regression in 9.2 |