| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: not fully correct error message |
| Date: | 2026-01-03 19:16:20 |
| Message-ID: | 517385.1767467780@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> writes:
> On 1/3/26 7:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, I like just adding "or procedure" and calling it good.
>> I do not think we need a regression test, either ...
> Yeah, let's keep it simple.
>> Poking around, I also found this:
>> src/backend/commands/wait.c: errdetail("WAIT FOR cannot be executed from a function or a procedure or within a transaction with an isolation level higher than READ COMMITTED."));
>> which is also not great grammar. What do you think of "WAIT FOR
>> cannot be executed from a function or procedure, nor within a
>> transaction with an isolation level higher than READ COMMITTED." ?
> Much better!
Putting that all together, and fixing affected regression tests
(yes, this code was covered already), I get the attached.
regards, tom lane
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-improve-vacuum-error-message.patch | text/x-diff | 3.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2026-01-03 19:23:01 | Re: should we have a fast-path planning for OLTP starjoins? |
| Previous Message | Kirill Reshke | 2026-01-03 19:10:13 | Re: GIN pageinspect support for entry tree and posting tree |