Re: notice about costly ri checks (2)
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: notice about costly ri checks (2) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200403051636.i25GaAp16627@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: notice about costly ri checks (2) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: notice about costly ri checks (2)
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > The reason I think we have to mention the constraint name is that you > > could have a multi-column primary/foreign key, so instead of mentioning > > each column, we just mention the constraint name, which should be easy > > to identify. > > However, the complaint will be about one single column being of a > non-matching type. In the case of a multicolumn foreign key, giving > only the constraint name is unhelpful. Even for a one-column key, > it's not obvious to me why the constraint name is better than the column > name. > > [ thinks... ] I guess it could be that the same column is being used in > several different FK constraints, so if we just give column names then > it would also be important to mention the referenced column. > > I'd suggest something along the lines of > > NOTICE: foreign key constraint "constrname" will require a cross-type conversion > DETAIL: key columns "fkcol" and "pkcol" are of different types integer and double precision I suggested the constraint name because of multi-column keys, where he would have to print an arbitrary number of columns in the message. It didn't seem worth doing that work. I see your idea of just printing the column, but that doesn't really point to the primary/foreign key relationship. If the user can't figure out which columns are a mismatch from the constraint name, they have larger problems than this. :-) > if you want to be really complete. > > I've got mixed feelings about the WARNING-vs-NOTICE issue. WARNING > seems too strong, like we are trying to tell them that it won't work at > all. Particularly with text like the above, which completely fails to > explain that the problem is only one of speed and not functionality. > If you want it to be a WARNING then we gotta work on the text some more. Yes, let's re-add 'costly' to the text: > WARNING: foreign key constraint "constrname" will require a costly cross-type conversion -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: