Re: 7.2.3 vacuum bug - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: 7.2.3 vacuum bug
Date
Msg-id 87smynb42t.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 7.2.3 vacuum bug  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: 7.2.3 vacuum bug
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> But relation "a" *does* exist at the start of client 2's operation.
> While I'm not here to defend the exact phrasing of this error message,
> it does seem to me that it's appropriate to give a different error
> message than what appears when the table wasn't found at all.

Ok, fair enough -- I agree that we should treat the two cases
differently. But one thing I think we should do in any case is improve
the wording of the error message.

Cheers,

Neil

-- 
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: move 0 behaviour
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 7.2.3 vacuum bug