On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Adrien Nayrat <adrien.nay...@dalibo.com> > wrote: >> As Julien said, there is nothing to notice that error comes from >> recovery.conf. >> My fear would be that an user encounters an error like this. Il will be >> difficult to link to the recovery.conf. > > Thinking a bit wider than that, we may want to know such context for > normal GUC parameters as well, and that's not the case now. Perhaps > there is actually a reason why that's not done for GUCs, but it seems > that it would be useful there as well. That would give another reason > to move all that under the GUC umbrella.
Maybe so, but that's been tried multiple times without success. If you think an error context is useful here, and I bet it is, I'd say just add it and be done with it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
