Re: error context for vacuum to include block number

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: error context for vacuum to include block number
Date: 2020-03-27 00:41:21
Message-ID: 20200327004121.GA20729@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-Mar-26, Justin Pryzby wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 07:49:51PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> > BTW I'm pretty sure this "revert back" phrasing is not good English --
> > you should just use "revert". Maybe get some native speaker's opinion
> > on it.
> I'm a native speaker; "revert back" might be called redundant but I think it's
> common usage.

Oh, okay.

> > And speaking of language, I find the particle "cbarg" rather very ugly,
> I renamed it since it was kind of opaque looking. It's in all the same places,
> so equally infectious; but I hope you like it better.

I like it much better, thanks :-)

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kartyshov Ivan 2020-03-27 01:15:59 Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2020-03-27 00:41:11 Re: SLRU statistics