From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: elog() error, trying CURENT OF with foreign table |
Date: | 2013-04-19 14:29:48 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZOGynVEy=zyb6-Wi1SdidcdbTFVw_X=8NdKpSdjru-dw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Yeah, that's an unimplemented feature.
>
>> So, should we just make that an
>> ereport(errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED), ...) instead of
>> elog()?
>
> I'm not that excited about the errcode; if we're going to do anything,
> changing the message text seems more important. Perhaps we could have
> it say "WHERE CURRENT OF is not supported for this table type"? That's
> jumping to conclusions about why the expression didn't get converted,
> but at least for this case it'd be a more useful user-facing message.
Yeah, it's probably good to improve the error message, too; and that
suggestion seems as good as any. But I still think it should be
ereport if it's user-facing.
My main concern was actually whether we ought to be detecting this
earlier in the process, before it gets as far as the executor. I
haven't scrutinized the code though so have no particular reason to
believe it's not OK as-is.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-04-19 14:46:43 | Re: elog() error, trying CURENT OF with foreign table |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-04-19 14:24:20 | Re: elog() error, trying CURENT OF with foreign table |