Re: duplicates rejected by index reports PGSQL_FATAL_ERROR

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: tj <tj(at)getlostspammer(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: duplicates rejected by index reports PGSQL_FATAL_ERROR
Date: 2003-10-31 21:16:36
Message-ID: 19823.1067634996@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

tj <tj(at)getlostspammer(dot)com> writes:
> Its not really a fatal error, is it? Shouldn't it be reported as a
> NONFATAL_ERROR ?

It's "fatal" to the particular query that was executing.
PGRES_NONFATAL_ERROR is only used for notice messages. These constant
names are perhaps rather poorly chosen, but we can't change them now
without incurring an unreasonable amount of confusion and backwards
compatibility problems ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Kirkwood 2003-10-31 21:18:14 Re: slow query performance
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-10-31 20:59:35 Re: Custom types and arrays