Re: elog() patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: elog() patch
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.30.0203011202220.687-100000@peter.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: elog() patch  ("Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>)
Responses Re: elog() patch  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD writes:

> SQL92 has WARNING, would that be a suitable addition to NOTICE ?
> INFO would not be added since it is like old NOTICE which would stay.
> So, instead of introducing a lighter level we would introduce a
> stronger level. (WARNING more important than NOTICE)
> If we change, we might as well adopt some more SQL'ism.

At the client side SQL knows two levels, namely a "completion condition"
and an "exception condition".  In the PostgreSQL client protocol, these
are distinguished as N and E message packets.  The tags of the messages
are irrelevant, they just serve as a guide to the user reading the
message.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD"
Date:
Subject: Re: elog() patch
Next
From: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD"
Date:
Subject: Re: elog() patch