Hi, I went through the patch and have a few thoughts on the security question.
> Is there a reason why the expression is not included in the error detail? > (For example, having such information appear in logs could pose a > security risk.) For clients: any role can read CHECK expressions from, including for tables it has no privileges on, so printing the expression doesn't seem to expose anything new. For the server log: an error entry already contains the table, column and constraint names, so expression looks less sensitive compared to them. Anything I should improve on? Regards, Yash
