On 9/25/17 15:09, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On 9/21/17 18:13, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Give a better error for duplicate entries in VACUUM/ANALYZE column list. > >> In the error message, we should write "specified more than once" instead >> of "specified twice", because that could otherwise look a bit silly: >> VACUUM ANALYZE vaccluster(i,i,i); >> ERROR: column "i" of relation "vaccluster" is specified twice > > OK. > >> (Also, the "is" doesn't seem to fit there.) > > Hm, reads fine to me, and I'd still rather include "is" in the > revised wording. Anybody else agree with Peter's wording?
Note a big deal. I'm just working off existing error messages:
About half of those, especially the "appears" ones, seem unhelpful for deciding whether to add "is" here; "is appears" just doesn't work.
I think the added length due to the "of relation %", makes dropping the 'is' sound more odd than those like "column % specified"
The middle ground would be writing: column "i" of relation "vaccluster" appears more than once; I'm good with using appears instead of deciding between [is] specified.
I'm not seeing that we have a formal distinction between "specified" and "appears"...
