My copy of SQL99 assigns

most specific type mismatch		2200G
null value, no indicator parameter	22002

but elog.h has it set up the other way around.  Can someone clear this up
for me?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:12:16 +0200 (CEST)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Error code mixup?
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> My copy of SQL99 assigns
> most specific type mismatch		2200G
> null value, no indicator parameter	22002
> but elog.h has it set up the other way around.  Can someone clear this up
> for me?

Hoo, that's interesting.  I believe that I actually built the original
version of errcodes.h by editing the list of codes in the Ada-binding
part of the spec (part 2 13.4 rule 2e), which includes, in my draft copy,

       DATA_EXCEPTION_NULL_VALUE_NO_INDICATOR_PARAMETER:
               constant SQLSTATE_TYPE :="2200G";
       DATA_EXCEPTION_MOST_SPECIFIC_TYPE_MISMATCH:
               constant SQLSTATE_TYPE :="22002";

But I see you're right that the table in section 22.1 has it the other
way around.  (Digs ... looks like the contradiction is still there in
the published spec.)  I wonder if there are any other inconsistencies?

Probably we should assume that the table in section 22.1 is
authoritative.

			regards, tom lane

Mon, 28 Jul 2003 10:49:13 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Error code mixup? 