Re: enhanced error fields
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Date: 2013-01-13T06:13:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Create a "sort support" interface API for faster sorting.
- c6e3ac11b60a 9.2.0 cited
Hello 2012/12/29 Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>: > * Pavel Stehule (pavel.stehule@gmail.com) wrote: >> it is a problem of this patch or not consistent constraints implementation ? > > Not sure, but I don't think it matters. You can blame the constraint > implementation, but that doesn't change my feelings about what we need > before we can accept a patch like this. Providing something which works > only part of the time and then doesn't work for very unclear reasons > isn't a good idea. Perhaps we need to fix the constraint implementation > and perhaps we need to fix the error information being returned, or most > likely we have to fix both, it doesn't change that we need to do > something more than just ignore this problem. so we have to solve this issue first. Please, can you do resume, what is and where is current constraint implementation raise strange/unexpected messages? one question when we will fix constraints, maybe we can use some infrastructure for enhanced error fields. What about partial commit now - just necessary infrastructure without modification of other code - I am thinking so there is agreement on new fields: column_name, table_name, schema_name, constraint_name and constraint_schema? Regards Pavel > > Thanks, > > Stephen