Re: "unexpected EOF" messages

Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I agree with Simon --- a disable for that specific message seems like a
>> kluge, and an ugly one at that.  (The right solution for this customer
>> is to fix their broken application.)  But a generic filter capability
>> might be useful enough to justify its keep.

> Are you thinking basically "regexp against the main text", or
> something else, when you say "generic filter capacity"?

In the context of yesterday's discussions, I wonder whether a filter by
SQLSTATE would be appropriate.
        regards, tom lane