Tom Lane escribió: > A comprehensive response to this type of gripe wouldn't be all that > "easy". In the first place, there'd be a lot of code to touch. Well, that makes it tedious, which is not the same as hard. > In the second place, the reason most of our messages don't already > contain schema names is that in the past we've judged it would be > mostly clutter; and given the infrequency of complaints I see no > reason to change that opinion. I tend to disagree. We can run a poll in a wider audience. > The type of fix I'd like to see would be to not change message texts at > all, but to add separate error-message fields for the name and schema > name of object(s) involved in an error; which would be details that > psql, for example, would show only in VERBOSE mode. Note that error > report fields along this line are actually required by the SQL spec > (cf GET DIAGNOSTICS) but we've never got round to implementing 'em. Now that's a bit more complex than the trivial solution of adding an extra %s to the error message, but it's still not all that difficult, I think. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
