On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Christoph Berg wrote:
>> Re: Thomas Munro 2017-08-10
>> <CAEepm=09jnv7hk5rtxpp816bmuve7djgbjtecjexrhaelhf...@mail.gmail.com>
>> > > Agreed. Here's a version that skips those useless detail messages
>> > > using a coding pattern I found elsewhere.
>> >
>> > Rebased after bf6b9e94.
>>
>> > message ? errdetail("Diagnostic message: %s", message) : 0));
>>
>> "Diagnostic message" doesn't really mean anything, and printing
>> "DETAIL: Diagnostic message: <something>" seems redundant to me. Maybe
>> drop that prefix? It should be clear from the context that this is a
>> message from the LDAP layer.
>
> I think making it visible that the message comes from LDAP (rather than
> Postgres or anything else) is valuable. How about this?
>
> LOG: could not start LDAP TLS session: Protocol error
> DETAIL: LDAP diagnostics: unsupported extended operation.
>
+1, pretty neat.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
