Re: Inconsistent error message wording for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2019-06-20T03:29:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2019-May-27, Michael Paquier wrote:

> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 12:20:58AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> > I notice your patch changes "catalog relations" to "system catalogs".
> > I think we predominantly prefer the latter, so that part of your change
> > seems OK.  (In passing, I noticed we have a couple of places using
> > "system catalog tables", which is weird.)
> 
> Good point.  These are not new though, so I would prefer not touch
> those parts for this patch.

Sure.

> > We do have "is not yet implemented" in a
> > couple of other places, so all things considered I'm not so sure about
> > changing that one to "cannot".
> 
> Okay.  I can live with this difference.  Not changing the string in
> ReindexRelationConcurrently() has the merit to be consistent with the
> existing ones in reindex_relation() and ReindexPartitionedIndex().
> Please find attached an updated version.  What do you think?

Looks good.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



Commits

  1. Rework some error strings for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY with system catalogs

  2. Improve and fix some error handling for REINDEX INDEX/TABLE CONCURRENTLY

  3. Clean up the behavior and API of catalog.c's is-catalog-relation tests.