Re: proposal: enable new error fields in plpgsql (9.4)

Hello

2013/6/28 Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 07:49:46AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> 2013/6/28 Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>:
>> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 03:56:27PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> >> cleaned patch is in attachment
>> >
>> > Of the five options you're adding to GET STACKED DIAGNOSTICS, four of them
>> > appear in the SQL standard.  DATATYPE_NAME does not; I think we should call it
>> > PG_DATATYPE_NAME in line with our other extensions in this area.
>> >
>>
>> yes, but It should be fixed in 9.3 enhanced fields too - it should be
>> consistent with PostgreSQL fields
>
> What else, specifically, should be renamed?  (Alternately, would you prepare a
> new version of the patch incorporating the proper name changes?)

I looked to source code, and identifiers in our source code are
consistent, so my comment hasn't sense. Yes, I agree, so only
identifier used in GET DIAGNOSTICS statement should be renamed. So,
only DATATYPE_NAME should be renamed to PG_DATATYPE_NAME.

Regards

Pavel

>
> Thanks,
> nm
>
> --
> Noah Misch
> EnterpriseDB                                 http://www.enterprisedb.com