| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: improving user.c error messages |
| Date: | 2023-01-27 16:17:13 |
| Message-ID: | 3335491.1674836233@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I almost hate to bring this up since I'm not sure how far we want to
> go down this rat hole, but what should be our policy about mentioning
> superuser? I don't think we're entirely consistent right now, and I'm
> not sure whether every error message needs to mention that if you were
> the superuser you could do everything. Is that something we should
> mention always, never, or in some set of circumstances?
Good point. My vote is for standardizing on *not* mentioning it.
Error messages should say "you need privilege X". That is not
the place to go into all the ways you could hold privilege X
(one of which is being superuser).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sébastien Lardière | 2023-01-27 16:17:35 | Re: Timeline ID hexadecimal format |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2023-01-27 16:01:51 | Re: Set arbitrary GUC options during initdb |