Re: Remaining 'needs review' patchs in July commitfest - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Remaining 'needs review' patchs in July commitfest
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoafKJc3p1jgYmqq-j1NuSb--ONfZi7o52ptv84gLYFSQw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Remaining 'needs review' patchs in July commitfest  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 5:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
>>>> plpgsql raise statement with context
>>> Impasse. Everyone wants this feature in some form, but no consensus on
>>> whether to do this client-side or server-side.
>
>> +1 for server-side.  Does anyone other than you even think that the
>> client side is a reasonable way to go?
>
> Yes.  This is presupposing on the server side what the client will want
> to display.

Fair enough.  I'm still not convinced we're doing anything other than
complicating what ought to be a simple matter.  It is just a fact that
logging tracing messages in PL/pgsql functions is a pain in the butt
right now in some situations because you get a huge number of CONTEXT
lines that you don't want.  Can we agree on some solution to that
problem without over-engineering this to infinity?

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: brin index vacuum versus transaction snapshots