On Wed, Mar 26, 2025, at 1:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Your patch needs some adjustments. There is no need to include pg_class.h. I
> don't like the proposed error message. I prefer saying the relation cannot be
> opened because that's what will happen if it reaches this code path.
I don't care for that proposal either: we just did open the relation ;-)
Fair point.
relcache.c:
elog(ERROR, "relation \"%s\" does not have storage",
RelationGetRelationName(relation));
So the previous proposal was evidently modeled on the first two of
these precedents. Personally I prefer messages that say *why*
something failed, so I'd go with something more like "relation \"%s\"
does not have storage". Use of errdetail_relkind_not_supported is
fine though.
I thought about saying "no storage" but don't know why was convinced by that
proposal. Your suggestion works for me.
