Thread: New error code to track unsupported contexts
Hi all, When pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects is run in a context that is not the one of an event trigger, currently the error code ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED is returned. Wouldn't it be better to have an error to define an out-of-context instead? It seems that it would be a good thing to have more error verbosity for situations like the case above. Note that this idea has been mentioned on this ML a couple of weeks back. In any case, attached is a patch showing the idea. Opinions? Is that worth having? Regards, -- Michael
Attachment
On 11/28/14 11:41 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi all, > > When pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects is run in a context that is not > the one of an event trigger, currently the error code > ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED is returned. Wouldn't it be better to > have an error to define an out-of-context instead? It seems that it > would be a good thing to have more error verbosity for situations like > the case above. Note that this idea has been mentioned on this ML a > couple of weeks back. In any case, attached is a patch showing the > idea. > > Opinions? Is that worth having? Anything ever happen with this? (FWIW, I'm in favor of it. Reporting the feature isn't supported is confusing...) -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
Jim Nasby wrote: > On 11/28/14 11:41 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > >Hi all, > > > >When pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects is run in a context that is not > >the one of an event trigger, currently the error code > >ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED is returned. Wouldn't it be better to > >have an error to define an out-of-context instead? It seems that it > >would be a good thing to have more error verbosity for situations like > >the case above. Note that this idea has been mentioned on this ML a > >couple of weeks back. In any case, attached is a patch showing the > >idea. > > > >Opinions? Is that worth having? > > Anything ever happen with this? (FWIW, I'm in favor of it. Reporting the > feature isn't supported is confusing...) Not opposed to the idea. Maybe it should be in class 39 'External Routine Invocation Exception' instead, like ERRCODE_E_R_I_E_TRIGGER_PROTOCOL_VIOLATED is used by various trigger functions. We could invent ERRCODE_E_R_I_E_EVENT_TRIGGER_PROTOCOL_VIOLATED with value 39P03, for example. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Jim Nasby wrote: >> On 11/28/14 11:41 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> >Hi all, >> > >> >When pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects is run in a context that is not >> >the one of an event trigger, currently the error code >> >ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED is returned. Wouldn't it be better to >> >have an error to define an out-of-context instead? It seems that it >> >would be a good thing to have more error verbosity for situations like >> >the case above. Note that this idea has been mentioned on this ML a >> >couple of weeks back. In any case, attached is a patch showing the >> >idea. >> > >> >Opinions? Is that worth having? >> >> Anything ever happen with this? (FWIW, I'm in favor of it. Reporting the >> feature isn't supported is confusing...) This got lost in translation.. > Not opposed to the idea. > > Maybe it should be in class 39 'External Routine Invocation Exception' > instead, like ERRCODE_E_R_I_E_TRIGGER_PROTOCOL_VIOLATED is used by > various trigger functions. We could invent > ERRCODE_E_R_I_E_EVENT_TRIGGER_PROTOCOL_VIOLATED with value 39P03, for > example. This looks fine to me, in the spirit of ERRCODE_E_R_I_E_TRIGGER_PROTOCOL_VIOLATED. A refreshed patch gives the attached, taking into account the event table_rewrite. Regards, -- Michael
Attachment
Pushed this. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
2015-04-09 3:45 GMT+09:00 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>: > Pushed this. Thanks! -- Michael