Thread: that picksplit debug message again
Is the %d actually in the right place here? errmsg("picksplit method for %d column of index \"%s\" failed", attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r)) And later in the file there is this, which might have the same problem: elog(LOG, "PickSplit method of %d columns of index '%s' doesn't support secondary split", attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r));
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > Is the %d actually in the right place here? > errmsg("picksplit method for %d column of index \"%s\" failed", > attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r)) No, any native speaker of English would say "for column %d". Putting "failed" at the end seems a bit awkward as well, though I can't offhand see a better phrasing. "picksplit method failed for ..." is *not* better; it implies there is only one picksplit method for everything, whereas the point of the message is that the one associated with this column failed. > And later in the file there is this, which might have the same problem: > elog(LOG, "PickSplit method of %d columns of index '%s' doesn't support > secondary split", > attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r)); Should be "for column %d" also, AFAICS, plus '' -> "" and lowercase "PickSplit" ... but this message isn't translatable anyway as an elog(). regards, tom lane
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 01:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > > Is the %d actually in the right place here? > > errmsg("picksplit method for %d column of index \"%s\" failed", > > attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r)) > > No, any native speaker of English would say "for column %d". Putting > "failed" at the end seems a bit awkward as well, though I can't offhand > see a better phrasing. "picksplit method failed for ..." is *not* > better; it implies there is only one picksplit method for everything, > whereas the point of the message is that the one associated with this > column failed. "has failed"? -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support