Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
>> Greg Stark wrote:
>>> If the "(n rows)" is the *only* message that needs it then I think it
>>> would be simpler to just make it "(Rows: n)" instead. But I wouldn't
>>> be surprised if there were other messages with similar issues.
>
>> There are a few more, e.g.,
>
>> %d index pages have been deleted
>> %d connections
>> Identifier must be less than %d characters.
>
> What's supposed to happen when a message contains more than one
> number (for example, most of the vacuum activity messages)?
Heh. Good point. That is not supported. It would obviously explode
the API. But I agree it's a problem.
Btw., you can find out how much of a problem by using
for x in $(find . -name "*.pot"); do msggrep -K -E -e '%[diu]
[[:alpha:]].*%[diu] [[:alpha:]]' $x; done
and manually hand-filtering the rest. I count about 16 problem
messages. They are mostly vacuum messages as well as messages of the
kind "expected %d things but received only %d items". There are a
number of additional messages that circumvent the problem by writing
"expected %d things but received only %d", but that is not possible in
all cases.
