| From: | Baji Shaik <baji(dot)pgdev(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Improve CREATE PUBLICATION error detail for a standalone table/schema name |
| Date: | 2026-10-26 14:25:59 |
| Message-ID: | CA+fm-RNYfcP=QMeQXQvNGZZ+A4U7kqC+_sx1E+yaFnvpSkX0bA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Peter,
On Sun, Oct 25, 2026 at 9:39 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> In summary, FWIW, I felt the existing message is adequate and might be
> better left alone. It's not perfect, but I think the caret is doing
> the job well enough. The patch HINT in particular introduces new
> problems. If you still want to include the name in the DETAIL, then
> you might need to address the quoting problem first (e.g. by wording
> it so it doesn't look like an identifier), but I'm not sure it's worth
> it.
Thanks for the review. Fair points, especially the ALTER PUBLICATION
case, where the HINT would be wrong. The caret does show where it went
wrong, and I don't have a case where it isn't enough. I'll withdraw
this. Thank you again.
Thanks,
Baji Shaik
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2026-10-26 14:31:22 | Re: Event trigger table rewrite doc missing ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW case |
| Previous Message | Greg Burd | 2026-10-26 14:12:34 | [PATCH] regression test: view and rule definitions must round trip |