X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 672CB47590C for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:33:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2EFX6ub021329; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:33:06 -0500 (EST) To: Darko Prenosil Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Upgrading the backend's error-message infrastructure In-reply-to: <200303141229.32585.darko.prenosil@finteh.hr> References: <9168.1047588660@sss.pgh.pa.us> <200303141229.32585.darko.prenosil@finteh.hr> Comments: In-reply-to Darko Prenosil message dated "Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:29:32 +0000" Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:33:05 -0500 Message-ID: <21328.1047655985@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Archive-Number: 200303/610 X-Sequence-Number: 36856 Darko Prenosil writes: > What about user messages ? > If I remember correct, MSSQL had a system catalog table with formated error > messages, and it was possible to raise error with error number and it's > parameters. It can be very useful when you must raise same error from > different places in the code. But that's exactly the direction we are *not* going in. We had that discussion a long time ago when we first started internationalizing our error messages. Peter Eisentraut convinced everybody that we did not want to tie error codes to unique error messages. [digs in archives ...] See for example http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1279991 I have no desire to revisit that choice. There is nothing to stop you from creating your own user-defined messages, and even adding them to the .po files in your installation if the need strikes. We aren't going to store them in any system table, however. regards, tom lane