Re: Proposed GUC Variable

tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane) wrote

> "Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu> writes:
>> I agree that a 'trimmed' query is likely to be useless, but the idea of
>> printing the query on ERROR is a big win for me:
>
> Certainly. I think though that an on-or-off GUC option is sufficient.
> We don't need a length, and we definitely don't need code to strip out
> whitespace as Bruce was suggesting ...

Just out of curiosity... how much harder would it be to have the GUC
variable represent the truncation length? so setting it to zero would be
equivalent to turning the feature off... I personally would have no use
for this feature, but I am just curious.