| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
| 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 17:09:56 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.30.0203011202220.687-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD writes:
> SQL92 has WARNING, would that be a suitable addition to NOTICE ?
> INFO would not be added since it is like old NOTICE which would stay.
> So, instead of introducing a lighter level we would introduce a
> stronger level. (WARNING more important than NOTICE)
> If we change, we might as well adopt some more SQL'ism.
At the client side SQL knows two levels, namely a "completion condition"
and an "exception condition". In the PostgreSQL client protocol, these
are distinguished as N and E message packets. The tags of the messages
are irrelevant, they just serve as a guide to the user reading the
message.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD | 2002-03-01 17:22:14 | Re: elog() patch |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD | 2002-03-01 17:01:12 | Re: elog() patch |