Re: elog() patch
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: elog() patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200203011809.g21I9ZJ17211@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: elog() patch (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD writes: > > > SQL92 has WARNING, would that be a suitable addition to NOTICE ? > > INFO would not be added since it is like old NOTICE which would stay. > > So, instead of introducing a lighter level we would introduce a > > stronger level. (WARNING more important than NOTICE) > > If we change, we might as well adopt some more SQL'ism. > > At the client side SQL knows two levels, namely a "completion condition" > and an "exception condition". In the PostgreSQL client protocol, these > are distinguished as N and E message packets. The tags of the messages > are irrelevant, they just serve as a guide to the user reading the > message. Yes, both INFO and NOTICE/WARNING will come to the client as N. Only the message tags will be different. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: