Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> At least if we think it's more than a very narrow legitimate use, compared
>> to the number of ppl making the mistake.
> Did we ever come to a conclusion on this or not? I've changed my patch
> per the suggestions in the thread, but I've held back on committing it
> to hear arguments... Go or no-go?
I'm inclined to vote no-go on the message. AFAIR we've only heard the
one complaint about this, so I'm not convinced there's a lot of people
making such a mistake. We did make the logic change to deal with the
underlying problem of a misleading error message after you'd done it,
and I think that might be enough.
regards, tom lane
