Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> writes: > On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 09:02 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> I disagree wholeheartedly. :-) My ideal error message is something like: >> >> DETAIL: (a, b, c)=(1, 2, 3) conflicts with (a, b, c)=(4, 5, 6)
> Ok, fair enough. But how do you feel about: > (a: 1, b: 2, c: 3) > as a tuple representation instead? This seems like change for the sake of change. We've been reporting this type of error (in the context of foreign keys) using the first syntax for a very long time. I don't feel a need to rearrange it. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers