| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: elog() patch |
| Date: | 2002-03-01 18:39:31 |
| Message-ID: | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA41EB533@m0114.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter writes:
> > I am referring to "completion condition" messages according
> to SQLSTATE:
> >
> > 00xxx: Success
>
> This is an INFO (or no message at all). The idea was that things like the
> automatic index creation for a PK would be INFO, and you could easily turn
> off INFO somehow.
>
> > 01xxx: Success with Warning
>
> This is a NOTICE.
>
> > 02xxx: Success but no rows found
>
> This is nothing special.
>
> > 03 and > : Failure
>
> This is is ERROR or above.
>
> > I see that there is no notion of INFO, thus I agree that INFO should not be
> > something normally sent to the user. INFO could be the first DEBUG Level,
> > or completely skipped.
>
> It's sort of the "tip" level. A lot of people don't like to see them, so
> it's reasonable to separate them from NOTICE. You could think of them as
> first debug level, if you like.
All agreed, matches what I was trying to say. Only I like the keyword
WARNING more than NOTICE.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jean-Paul ARGUDO | 2002-03-01 18:44:10 | Re: Oracle vs PostgreSQL in real life : NEWS!!! |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD | 2002-03-01 18:37:33 | Re: elog() patch |