=?UTF-8?B?SmFuIEt1bmRyw6F0?= <j...@flaska.net> writes:
> Attached is a second version of this patch which keeps the size of the
> output at 64 characters per column (which is an arbitrary value defined
> as a const int, which I hope matches your style). Longer values have
> their last three characters replaced by "...", so there's no way to
> distinguish them from a legitimate string that ends with just that.
> There's also no escaping of special-string values, similar to how the
> BuildIndexValueDescription operates.
Applied with some revisions; notably, that I pulled the code out into a
separate subroutine so that it could be used for more than one thing.
I was wondering in particular whether it wouldn't be appropriate to
include the same errdetail in ExecConstraints's other check, the one
for null in not-null columns. Arguably a not-null check is just a
slightly optimized form of a CHECK constraint, and anyway if you think
you need row identification info for a CHECK failure I don't see why
you'd not want it for NOT NULL failure. Comments?
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
