Just wanting some feedback on those psql improvements I put through.  Have people been using psql in CVS?  Do you like the new format?  

Chris

Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:38:33 +0800
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
psql improvements
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 11:38:33AM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Just wanting some feedback on those psql improvements I put through.
> Have people been using psql in CVS?  Do you like the new format?  

Maybe this is counter-feedback:  I've been using an ancient version
(7.1.3 I think) and I really would like that psql to be like the
one in CVS :-(

My CVS copy barely bootstraps now, so I don't use psql much.  But for
the few times I've used it, yeah, I like the format.

Unrelated: I just need to finish smgrDoPendingDeletes() and I'll submit
a preliminar patch for nested transactions so people can review and
comment.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"Escucha y olvidarás; ve y recordarás; haz y entenderás" (Confucio)


Sun, 6 Apr 2003 23:48:25 -0400
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl>
Re: psql improvements
There doesn't seem to be any way to get error reporting with unique 
identifiers for each type of error (or warning or notice). Is this 
something planned for the future? Would this be a daunting task because 
the various messages are strewn throughout the sources? Would 
centralized error strings (and ids) be appreciated for easier 
automation parsing? Just some thoughts...I might offer to tackle this 
unless there is some reason not to do so.


Mon, 7 Apr 2003 00:40:28 -0400
"A.M." <agentm@cmu.edu>
Errors uniquely identified