Re: [patch] ENUM errdetail should mention bytes, not chars - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Julien Rouhaud
Subject Re: [patch] ENUM errdetail should mention bytes, not chars
Date
Msg-id CAOBaU_Z=nqiSGjtD_+bak61QLVwPuaibWg=WgcatdWWaDA4Jcg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [patch] ENUM errdetail should mention bytes, not chars  (Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [patch] ENUM errdetail should mention bytes, not chars  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:18 PM Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> The errdetail emitted when creating/modifying an ENUM value is misleading:
>
>     postgres=# CREATE TYPE enum_valtest AS ENUM (
>                 'foo',
>                 'ああああああああああああああああああああああ'
>                );
>     ERROR:  invalid enum label "ああああああああああああああああああああああ"
>     DETAIL:  Labels must be 63 characters or less.
>
> Attached trivial patch changes the message to:
>
>     DETAIL:  Labels must be 63 bytes or less.
>
> This matches the documentation, which states:
>
>     The length of an enum value's textual label is limited by the NAMEDATALEN
>     setting compiled into PostgreSQL; in standard builds this means at most
>     63 bytes.
>
>     https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/datatype-enum.html
>
> I don't see any particular need to backpatch this.

Indeed the message is wrong, and patch LGTM.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ian Lawrence Barwick
Date:
Subject: [patch] ENUM errdetail should mention bytes, not chars
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: partition routing layering in nodeModifyTable.c