"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 5:46 PM Andy Fan <zhihuifan1...@163.com> wrote:
>
> > Per recent discussion[1], plpgsql returns fairly unhelpful "syntax
> > error" messages when a %TYPE or %ROWTYPE construct references a
> > nonexistent object. Here's a quick little finger exercise to try
> > to improve that.
>
> Looks this modify the error message, I want to know how ould we treat
> error-message-compatible issue during minor / major upgrade.
>
> There is no bug here so no back-patch; and we are not yet past feature freeze
> for v17.
Acutally I didn't asked about back-patch. I meant error message is an
part of user interface, if we change a error message, the end
user may be impacted, at least in theory. for example, end-user has some
code like this:
String errMsg = ex.getErrorMsg();
if (errMsg.includes("a-target-string"))
{
// do sth.
}
So if the error message is changed, the above code may be broken.
I have little experience on this, so I want to know the policy we are
using, for the background which I said in previous reply.
--
Best Regards
Andy Fan
