2015-01-26 13:02 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja <ma...@joh.to>: > On 1/22/15 6:03 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> 2015-01-22 12:37 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja <ma...@joh.to>: >> >>> Or is that a stupid idea? I just think hacking libpq for something like >>> this is a huge overkill. >>> >>> >> I don't think so only plpgsql solution is satisfactory idea. There are >> some mix plpgsql / plperl ... application - and it isn't possible to >> remove >> error context from only one language. >> > > Yeah, not in libpq it isn't. Thing is, PL/PgSQL already is the exception > here, since it's the only language which does this error message > suppression. So if people did think this suppression was a good idea, only > the people using PL/PgSQL were vocal enough to get the behavior changed. > I'm not looking to change that. >
> I can see where it's a lot nicer not to have the context visible for > people who only care about the contents of the message, but the way it's > done in PL/PgSQL right now is just not good enough. On the other hand, the > backwards compatibility breakage of doing this in libpq is quite > extensive. The most simple option seems to be to just allow a GUC to > change PL/PgSQL's behavior to match what all other PLs are doing. > libpq was changed more time - there is still a open task about a protocol change. I afraid about some unexpected side effects of your proposal if somebody mix languages - these side effects should not be critical - but on second hand current behave is not critical too - we can wait. > > > .marko >
