Re: enhanced error fields

Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "anarazel@anarazel.de" <andres@anarazel.de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Date: 2013-01-05T18:06:57Z
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 →
  1. Create a "sort support" interface API for faster sorting.

2013/1/5 Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com>:
> On 5 January 2013 16:56, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It seems that we're in agreement, then. I'll prepare a version of the
>>> patch very similar to the one I previously posted, but with some
>>> caveats about how reliably the values can be used. I think that that
>>> should be fine.
>>
>> is there agreement of routine_name and trigger_name fields?
>
> Well, Tom and I are both opposed to including those fields. Peter E
> seemed to support it in some way, but didn't respond to Tom's
> criticisms (which were just a restatement of my own). So, it seems to
> me that we're not going to do that, assuming nothing changes.

if I understand well Robert Haas is for including these fields - so
score is still 2:2 - but this is not a  match :)

I have no more new arguments for these fields - yes, there are no change

Pavel

>
> --
> Peter Geoghegan       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services