Re: elog() error, trying CURENT OF with foreign table - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: elog() error, trying CURENT OF with foreign table
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZOGynVEy=zyb6-Wi1SdidcdbTFVw_X=8NdKpSdjru-dw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: elog() error, trying CURENT OF with foreign table  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: elog() error, trying CURENT OF with foreign table
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> Yeah, that's an unimplemented feature.
>
>> So, should we just make that an
>> ereport(errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED), ...) instead of
>> elog()?
>
> I'm not that excited about the errcode; if we're going to do anything,
> changing the message text seems more important.  Perhaps we could have
> it say "WHERE CURRENT OF is not supported for this table type"?  That's
> jumping to conclusions about why the expression didn't get converted,
> but at least for this case it'd be a more useful user-facing message.

Yeah, it's probably good to improve the error message, too; and that
suggestion seems as good as any.  But I still think it should be
ereport if it's user-facing.

My main concern was actually whether we ought to be detecting this
earlier in the process, before it gets as far as the executor.  I
haven't scrutinized the code though so have no particular reason to
believe it's not OK as-is.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: elog() error, trying CURENT OF with foreign table
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: elog() error, trying CURENT OF with foreign table