Tom Lane wrote: > +1 on using the parser location mechanism and avoiding the > terminology problem altogether.
I figured we would let the parser only point to the UNION or VALUES or whatever word. It would be fairly cumbersome to drag the individual expression positions down into select_common_value() for full precision. > I fear though that we're not set up > to have multiple locations in one error report. Will it be > sufficient if we point at one of the two offending expressions? (I'd > guess pointing at the second makes the most sense, if feasible.) I don't think that would help. In the example I was looking at 90 expression and I had no idea in most cases what their results types are, so if it tells me that the 15th expression somewhere doesn't match, I would need to know which is the other mismatching one. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
