Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> While reviewing the IF NOT EXISTS patch for CREATE USER MAPPING I
> noticed that in several places we treat the user name as the name of the
> user mapping. Strictly ISTM that user mappings are really anonymous
> objects, so instead of something like user "mapping \"%s\" does not
> exist for the server" we should possibly have "user mapping for user
> \"%s\" does not exist for the server". I was about to make that change
> in the patch when I saw that it was consistent with current usage. Do we
> want to stick with the current usage where we treat the user name as the
> mapping name, or change it?
Hmm, I vaguely recall that due to some previous discussion I changed
some of uses of the former wording to your proposed one, which I agree
is an improvement.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
