Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: error message when subscriptiontarget is a partitioned table - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: error message when subscriptiontarget is a partitioned table
Date
Msg-id 20190108021023.GI22498@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: error message when subscriptiontarget is a partitioned table  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: error message when subscriptiontarget is a partitioned table  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 05:28:27PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2019/01/07 16:35, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> It seems to me that we may want something more like:
>> Primary: "could not use \"%s.%s\" as logical replication target".
>> Detail: "Relation %s.%s is a foreign table", "not a table", etc.
>
> I've thought about that before and I tend to agree with you.  Maybe:
>
> ERROR: cannot use "%s.%s" as logical replication target
> DETAIL: Using partitioned tables as logical replication target is not
> supported.
>
> Sounds a bit repetitive, but perhaps it's better to use the words "not
> supported" in the DETAIL message.

Or the detailed message could just say "\"%s.%s\" is a foreign table"
and such flavor for other relkinds?  It is redundant to repeat
"logical replication target" for both message parts.  The primary
message to use "cannot" instead of "could" is much better, so that
part sounds fine to me.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Displaying and dumping of table access methods
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Displaying and dumping of table access methods