Re: 5 new entries for FAQ

pgman wrote:
> Dan Armbrust wrote:
> > I liked the FAQ entry written up by the original submitter much better,
> > WRT to the long index issue. This write up does not contain the actual
> > error message encountered, so its not going to be found by someone
> > looking for a solution to the problem. It doesn't contain the optional
> > workaround, and it doesn't have a link into the full text searching
> > features as the recommended fix. I was one of the more recent people
> > to encounter this problem, and I don't think that this FAQ would have
> > helped me (if I even saw it, because google certainly won't pick it up
> > in a way that most people will search when the encounter the issue -
> > they are going to put in the error message)
> > Dan
>
> True, but we don't have an FAQ that hits every single problem users will
> encounter. We try to make the FAQ concise so most people will read all
> the items. If the item come up more often, we will consider making it
> more prominent.

I thought again about your issue and I now remember the proper way to
help users in this case is to improve the error message. I have added a
"hint" message for the case of indexing large values, patch attached.

[ Sorry about a patch to general but it seems necessary in this case.]

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073