| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Refactoring SearchSysCache + HeapTupleIsValid |
| Date: | 2008-12-11 16:39:29 |
| Message-ID: | 20081211163929.GG3807@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> About the error message, I find neither version to be very good. People see
> these messages and don't know what to do.
I agree. People see this:
ERROR: cache lookup failure for constraint 123123123
and they think it means the same as this:
ERROR: cache lookup failure for relation 456456456
The difference is subtle for people that are not -hackers regulars (I
had a case of this just yesterday); they immediately start to think
about temp tables and plpgsql functions, even with the first error
message, even when we say that we solved the underlying problem.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-12-11 16:53:42 | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268) |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-12-11 16:39:10 | Re: WIP: default values for function parameters |