| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: superuser() shortcuts |
| Date: | 2014-11-26 14:53:40 |
| Message-ID: | 20141126145340.GO1639@alvin.alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andres Freund (andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> > On 2014-11-26 08:33:10 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Doesn't that argument then apply to the other messages which I pointed
> > > out in my follow-up to Andres, where the detailed info is in the hint
> > > and the main error message is essentially 'permission denied'?
> >
> > A permission error on a relation is easier to understand than one
> > for some abstract 'replication' permission.
>
> The more I consider this and review the error message reporting policy,
> the more I feel that the original coding was wrong and that this change
> *is* the correct one to make.
+1. I don't care for the idea of "not moving from main error message to
errdetail" -- the rationale seems to be that errdetail might be hidden,
lost, or otherwise not read by the user; if that is so, why do we have
errdetail in the first place? We might as well just move all the
errdetails into the main message, huh?
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Tiffin | 2014-11-26 14:56:08 | Re: [pgsql-packagers] Palle Girgensohn's ICU patch |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-11-26 14:52:43 | Re: Follow up to irc on CREATE INDEX vs. maintenance_work_mem on 9.3 |