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
-
Rework some error strings for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY with system catalogs
- 20e1cc898da6 12.0 landed
-
Improve and fix some error handling for REINDEX INDEX/TABLE CONCURRENTLY
- 508300e2e141 12.0 landed
-
Clean up the behavior and API of catalog.c's is-catalog-relation tests.
- 2d7d946cd323 12.0 landed