On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 6:31 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 09:53, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 10:05 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > Do we have an actual patch here? > > > > > > > We have a patch, but it needs some more work like finding similar > > places and change all of them at the same time and then change the > > tests to adapt the same. > > > > Hi all, > Based on above discussion, I tried to find out all the places where we need > to change error for "not null constraint". As Amit Kapila pointed out 1 > place, I changed the error and adding modified patch. >
It seems you have not used the two error codes (ERRCODE_NOT_NULL_VIOLATION and ERRCODE_CHECK_VIOLATION) pointed by me above. > What does this patch? > Before this patch, to display error of "not-null constraint", we were not > displaying relation name in some cases so attached patch is adding relation > name with the "not-null constraint" error in 2 places. I didn't changed out > files of test suite as we haven't finalized error messages. > > I verified Robert's point of for partition tables also. With the error, we > are adding relation name of "child table" and i think, it is correct. > Can you show the same with the help of an example? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
