From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | NOTICE vs WARNING resolution |
Date: | 2003-10-01 22:26:30 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0310020021420.2932-100000@peter.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Following up to the discussion a few weeks ago and in accordance with the
criteria developed there about how a message should be classified NOTICE
or WARNING, I have identified the following cases that ought to be
reclassified:
change WARNING to NOTICE:
table "%s" has no indexes [during REINDEX]
change NOTICE to WARNING:
changing return type of function %s from "opaque" to xxx
INTERVAL(%d) precision reduced to maximum allowed, %d
I also thought that
copyObject() failed to produce an equal parse tree
should be made an elog() because it's an internal error.
Objections?
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2003-10-01 22:28:50 | Re: Lost mails |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2003-10-01 22:23:16 | Re: Thoughts on maintaining 7.3 |