From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: wCTE cannot be used to update parent inheritance table |
Date: | 2012-01-29 21:19:20 |
Message-ID: | CAEYLb_VtJ+P6HfgYCu0L28v71dykGPUEDar73-kNAn8WS9s+AA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 29 January 2012 20:52, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Seems like a lot of make-work. The fact that it's got an XX000 SQLSTATE
> is already sufficient confirmation that the problem is an internal one,
> if the DBA isn't sure about that already.
I'm not worried about the DBA not being able to figure that out - it
seems like they'd stand a pretty good chance of figuring it out
quickly once they were aware of the problem. Rather, I share Robert's
concern:
On 23 November 2011 02:49, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> There is no sort of systematic labeling of error messages in the log
> to enable the DBA to figure out that the first error message is likely
> nothing more serious than an integrity constraint doing its bit to
> preserve data integrity, while the second is likely a sign of
> impending disaster.
Is it really that much of a problem to create a new severity level for
this stuff?
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-01-29 21:33:13 | Re: BUG #6416: Expression index not used with UNION ALL queries |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-01-29 20:53:25 | Re: wCTE cannot be used to update parent inheritance table |