Re: improving user.c error messages

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: improving user.c error messages
Date: 2023-01-26 20:07:43
Message-ID: 3165700.1674763663@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 02:42:05PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Basically my question is whether having one error message for all of
>> those cases is good enough, or whether we should be trying harder.

I think the password case needs to be kept separate, because the
conditions for it are different (specifically the exception that
you can alter your own password). Lumping the rest together
seems OK to me.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2023-01-26 20:08:27 Re: Something is wrong with wal_compression
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-01-26 20:04:30 Re: suppressing useless wakeups in logical/worker.c