On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 9:24 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>
> On 2021-Apr-26, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>
> > I agree that we can just be clear about the problem. Looks like the
> > majority of the errors "conflicting or redundant options" are for
> > redundant options. So, wherever "conflicting or redundant options"
> > exists: 1) change the message to "option \"%s\" specified more than
> > once" and remove parser_errposition if it's there because the option
> > name in the error message would give the info with which user can
> > point to the location
>
> Hmm, I would keep the parser_errposition() even if the option name is
> mentioned in the error message. There's no harm in being a little
> redundant, with both the option name and the error cursor showing the
> same thing.
Agreed.
> > 2) change the message to something like "option \"%s\" is conflicting
> > with option \"%s\"".
>
> Maybe, but since these would all be special cases, I think we'd need to
> discuss them individually. I would suggest that in order not to stall
> this patch, these cases should all stay as "redundant or conflicting
> options" -- that is, avoid any further change apart from exactly the
> thing you came here to change. You can submit a 0002 patch to change
> those other errors. That way, even if those changes end up rejected for
> whatever reason, you still got your 0001 done (which would change the
> bulk of "conflicting or redundant" error to the "option %s already
> specified" error). Some progress is better than none.
+1 to have all the conflicting options error message changes as 0002
patch or I'm okay even if we discuss those changes after the 0001
patch goes in.
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
