Hi,
I went through the patch and have a few thoughts on the security question.
> Is there a reason why the expression is not included in the error detail?
> (For example, having such information appear in logs could pose a
> security risk.)
For clients: any role can read CHECK expressions from, including for
tables it has no privileges on, so printing the expression doesn't
seem to expose anything new.
For the server log: an error entry already contains the table, column
and constraint names, so expression looks less sensitive compared to
them.
Anything I should improve on?
Regards,
Yash