4 ms·
You don't need to know the name; I prefer to go by the error code PG spits back at you. In this case 23505. https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/errcodes-ap
by 1a527dd5 2y ago
You don't need to know the name; I prefer to go by the error code PG spits back at you. In this case 23505.
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/errcodes-appendix.html https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/errcodes-appendix.ht...
That is much more flexible than hard coding the name.
- VWWHFSfQ 2y agoIf you have multiple unique constraints in the same table then it will spit back the same error code. I want to know the name of the specific constraint that was violated. Always name your indexes. Always name your constraints.
- 1a527dd5 2y agoI mean if you have that many violations that points to other problems, but sure if you are in that situation I can see how catching by name might be helpful. It's not a panacea.
- VWWHFSfQ 2y agoIt's not that hard to just name the things you care about instead of relying on auto-generated stuff from the database. PG lets you do this easily. > if you have that many violations that points to other problems No, it doesn't. This is a sophisticated design choice. You might be out of your depth here.