Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > > Right now, log_error_verbosity displays the source code error location
> > > in this format:
> >
> > > LOCATION: parserOpenTable, parse_relation.c:858
> >
> > > I think it would be clearer to add '()' next to the function name. We
> > > use '() to display function names in our docs and I think using '()'
> > > would clarify the output, e.g.:
> >
> > > LOCATION: parserOpenTable(), parse_relation.c:858
> >
> > Seems like a waste of log space to me. The convention about writing ()
> > to decorate function names is hardly universal, and anyway it's mainly
> > useful to mark things that the reader might not realize are function
> > names. This can't be anything else.
>
> I suggested it because it wasn't obvious to me it was a function name,
> so I figured others might not recognize it. Remember, we deal with the
> C code all the time so we have to consider how the general user would
> see it.
FYI, here is the output that had me confused:
ERROR: 42P01: relation "lkjasdf" does not exist at character 15LOCATION: parserOpenTable,
parse_relation.c:858STATEMENT: select * from lkjasdf;
Without the '()', I thought the LOCATION related to the query error
location, not the source code error location. This is what the new
format would look like, which I think is clearer:
ERROR: 42P01: relation "lkjasdf" does not exist at character 15LOCATION: parserOpenTable(),
parse_relation.c:858STATEMENT: select * from lkjasdf;
Of course, maybe the word LOCATION is wrong and it should be FUNCTION:
ERROR: 42P01: relation "lkjasdf" does not exist at character 15FUNCTION: parserOpenTable(),
parse_relation.c:858STATEMENT: select * from lkjasdf;
or SOURCE:
ERROR: 42P01: relation "lkjasdf" does not exist at character 15SOURCE: parserOpenTable(),
parse_relation.c:858STATEMENT: select * from lkjasdf;
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +