Re: the case for machine-readable error fields - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: the case for machine-readable error fields
Date
Msg-id 603c8f070908041816r34cd8b84l6b363f4dad1823cd@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: the case for machine-readable error fields  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: the case for machine-readable error fields  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Joshua D. Drake<jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
>> So, we are just trying to whip into shape explain diagnostics which are
>> in JSON or XML, and now you want us to exclude XML from this one because
>> you don't like it? Can we please try for some consistency?
>>
>> Sorry to break it to you, but there are plenty of people and businesses
>> who want XML. And I certainly don't want to have to master every data
>> representation model out there. XML has far more traction than anything
>> else that's comparable in my experience.
>>
>> The fact that Greg is prepared to suggest CSV, with its obvious serious
>> deficiencies, as being *better* than XML, makes his whole argument
>> highly suspect IMNSHO.
>
> From a business perspective, XML is the only viable option for output.

Wow, I feel like it's time for a bench-clearing brawl!

My serialization format kicks your serialization format's butt!

This doesn't have a whole lot to do with the original topic of this
thread, which unless I missed something had only to do with extending
the FE/BE protocol, but it definitely makes for lively conversation.
Anyone want to vote ASN.1 for world domination?  Can we set up some
kind of cage match between the dueling standards?

...Robert


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DefaultACLs
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: md.c should not call files "relations"