Re: verbose mode for pg_input_error_message?

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: verbose mode for pg_input_error_message?
Date: 2023-01-10 23:41:12
Message-ID: 20230110234112.GA1471581@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 04:18:59PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 2023-01-02 Mo 10:44, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't think that just concatenating those strings would make for a
>> pleasant API. More sensible, perhaps, to have a separate function
>> that returns a record. Or we could redefine the existing function
>> that way, but I suspect that "just the primary error" will be a
>> principal use-case.
>>
>> Being able to get the SQLSTATE is likely to be interesting too.
>
> OK, here's a patch along those lines.

My vote would be to redefine the existing pg_input_error_message() function
to return a record, but I recognize that this would inflate the patch quite
a bit due to all the existing uses in the tests. If this is the only
argument against this approach, I'm happy to help with the patch.

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-01-10 23:50:31 Re: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2023-01-10 23:26:34 wal_compression = method:level