On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 5:30 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvhe...@kurilemu.de> writes: > > Hmm, what about 2c. having pgfdw_report_error() with hardcoded elevel, > > but complement it with pgfdw_report() that takes the elevel as argument, > > asserting that it's less than ERROR? Then the calls look like > > pgfdw_report(WARNING, "doo dee"); > > > which makes sense IMO and we don't have to worry about the future. > > This is the same as my 2a except for the choice of function name. > I'd be fine with it, but Robert didn't like 2a.
I think I like this a little better than your 2a. It's not a big deal, anyway. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
