From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: primary key error message |
Date: | 2010-01-21 20:51:09 |
Message-ID: | 13520.1264107069@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> Here is a small patch that changes the error message
>>
>> duplicate key value violates unique constraint "%s"
>>
>> into
>>
>> duplicate key value violates primary key "%s"
>>
>> when the constraint is in fact a primary key.
>>
>> Comments?
> Why bother? And why bother now, when we're in the middle of the last
> CommitFest and trying to move toward a release?
This patch fails to cover all cases (index build being the obvious
omission, but I think there might be other paths as well where the
information is not so readily available). And I agree with Robert
that the usefulness is at best highly debatable.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-21 21:10:17 | Re: PITR backup history files with identical 2nd part file names |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-01-21 20:47:04 | Re: primary key error message |