Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> Well, we could use an optional "details" string for that. If not, we
> are still using the magic-string approach, which I thought we didn't
> like.
No, we're not using magic strings, we're using an enum --- maybe not an
officially declared enum type, but it's a column with a predetermined
set of possible values. It would be a magic string if it were still in
the "query" field and thus confusable with user-written queries.
regards, tom lane