"Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com> writes:
>> We're really not going to address this type of complaint on a
>> one-error-message-at-a-time basis. See prior discussions --- a more
>> realistic (and standards compliant) approach will probably involve
>> adding fields to the verbose form of the error message.
> Pointers to previous discussions welcome.
The most recent one I can find is the thread starting at
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-11/msg00846.php
> I was simply trying to
> fix a specific problem I was having, but some digging shows the
> problem is already solved for most (all?) other similar cases:
Um, no, it's not solved. There are a huge number of error messages
that refer to database objects by name only, even though the name
might be ambiguous. It's not reasonable to fix them one at a time,
especially not in a fashion that breaks regression tests ;-).
My own preference for what to do about this is to leave the primary
message texts alone and add additional error-message fields for object
name and schema. This would address the need without making messages
uglier for the large fraction of users who don't really care; and it
would also help us get closer to the SQL standard's expectations for
error reporting.
regards, tom lane
