From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Paul Martinez <paulmtz(at)google(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] pg_hba.conf error messages for logical replication connections |
Date: | 2021-02-16 10:22:11 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+Ebvc+pLXBBRFEUtLmozOjhrb-v9deCG_-0X+tzPgQVw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 1:43 AM Paul Martinez <paulmtz(at)google(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 8:41 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, hints or more details might improve the situation but I am not
> > sure we want to add more branching here. Can we write something
> > similar to HOSTNAME_LOOKUP_DETAIL for hints? Also, I think what you
> > are proposing to write is more of a errdetail kind of message. See
> > more error routines in the docs [1].
> >
>
> Alright, I've updated both sets of error messages to use something like
> HOSTNAME_LOOKUP_DETAIL, both for the error message itself, and for the
> extra detail message about the replication keyword. Since now we specify
> both an errdetail (sent to the client) and an errdetail_log (sent to the
> log), I renamed HOSTNAME_LOOKUP_DETAIL to HOSTNAME_LOOKUP_DETAIL_LOG.
>
I don't think we need to update the error messages, it makes the code
a bit difficult to parse without much benefit. How about just adding
errdetail? See attached and let me know what you think?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
pg_hba_conf_error_message_patch_v02.patch | application/octet-stream | 3.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2021-02-16 11:39:08 | Re: progress reporting for partitioned REINDEX |
Previous Message | David Rowley | 2021-02-16 10:15:51 | Re: Hybrid Hash/Nested Loop joins and caching results from subplans |