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

Re: [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure
Date: 2003-03-16 14:06:19
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0303160302550.3020-100000@peter.localdomain (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-interfaces
Tom Lane writes:

> Given that we now need order-of-thirty possible field types, do you feel
> uncomfortable with a single-byte field identifier in the FE/BE protocol?
> I'm still leaning that way on the grounds of compactness and programming
> simplicity, but I can see where someone might want to argue it won't do
> in the long run.

There's a possible solution:  SQL99 part 3 defines numerical codes for
each of these fields (table 12/section 5.14).  The codes are between
around 0 and 40.  (Don't be confused by the negative code numbers in the
table; those are only for use within ODBC.)

Peter Eisentraut   peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2003-03-16 14:08:31
Subject: Re: Error message style guide
Previous:From: Bruno Wolff IIIDate: 2003-03-16 13:37:26
Subject: Re: ALTER USER

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-03-16 17:59:12
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure
Previous:From: Agrawal, ManishDate: 2003-03-15 16:45:38
Subject: Visual query designer

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