Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink and postgres_fdw - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink and postgres_fdw
Date
Msg-id 1312.1482343733@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink and postgres_fdw  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of "unknown error" in dblink andpostgres_fdw  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
>>> I propose that we should change that string to "could not obtain message
>>> string for error on connection "foo"", or something along that line.

BTW, looking closer, I notice that the dblink case already has
         errcontext("Error occurred on dblink connection named \"%s\": %s.",                    dblink_context_conname,
dblink_context_msg)));

so we probably don't need the connection name in the primary error
message.  Now I think "could not obtain message string for remote error"
would be a sufficient message.

In the postgres_fdw case, I'd be inclined to use the same replacement
primary message.  Maybe we should think about adding the server name
to the errcontext there, but that seems like an independent improvement.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Borodin
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_background contrib module proposal
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)