Re: Include schema-qualified names in publication error messages.

On Mon, May 4, 2026 at 10:51 AM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 7:23 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 30 Apr 2026 at 7:14 PM, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 30, 2026, at 4:37 AM, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Yeah we may, but I feel what we have now looks more readable.
> >> >
> >>
> >> My suggestion is that this function should be available in a central place.
> >> That's not the only place that could use qualified schema and relation. If you
> >> search for get_namespace_name_or_temp you will notice that this code path is
> >> repeated in other parts of the code too (see ruleutils.c). It would be good if
> >> we can have a common path for it. Maybe the signature has to be
> >> get_qualified_relname(Oid) to accommodate
> >
> >
> > IMHO it’s not a good idea to use Oid when you already have reldesc.
>
> +1.
>
> I looked at other use cases of get_namespace_name_or_temp(), and there
> doesn’t seem to be any case where we already have a Relation
> descriptor. So this appears to be a unique scenario, and I feel adding
> a new function here makes sense. If needed, ruleutils.c’s
> generate_qualified_relation_name() could be moved to a common location
> in a separate patch.
>

I think for HEAD, we can move the common part of
generate_qualified_relation_name() and get_qualified_relname() to a
common function that takes relname as input. We can probably move it
to lsyscache.c.

Now, we also need to decide whether to backpatch the relevant change
to back-branches. It seems we didn't get the bug-report yet but
clearly what we do currently is not correct. So, we should ideally
backpatch it and in the back branches we don't need to expose it.
OTOH, as it is reported and is not a big issue, so we can keep this as
a HEAD only change as well. If we want to keep this as a HEAD only
change then shall we wait for PG20 branch to open or go for current
HEAD itself? What do you and or others think on this matter?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.