Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: enhanced error fields

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "anarazel(at)anarazel(dot)de" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Subject: Re: enhanced error fields
Date: 2013-01-05 16:56:30
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
2013/1/4 Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>:
> 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.

is there agreement of routine_name and trigger_name fields?



> --
> Peter Geoghegan
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2013-01-05 16:58:19
Subject: Re: Reporting hba lines
Previous:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2013-01-05 16:55:03
Subject: Re: enhanced error fields

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group