Re: generic plans and "initial" pruning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: generic plans and "initial" pruning
Date
Msg-id 2369348.1733333533@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: generic plans and "initial" pruning  (Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>)
Responses Re: generic plans and "initial" pruning
List pgsql-hackers
Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me> writes:
> I'm not forcing you to do elog, if you think ereport() is better. I'm
> only asking because AFAIK the "policy" is that ereport is for cases that
> think can happen (and thus get translated), while elog(ERROR) is for
> cases that we believe shouldn't happen.

The proposed coding looks fine from that perspective, because it uses
errmsg_internal and errdetail_internal which don't give rise to
translatable strings.  Having said that, if we think this is a
"can't happen" case then it's fair to wonder why go to such lengths
to format it prettily.  Also, I'd argue that the error message
style guidelines still apply, but this errdetail doesn't conform.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [18] Unintentional behavior change in commit e9931bfb75
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: deferred writing of two-phase state files adds fragility