| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW ownership error message |
| Date: | 2018-08-18 21:52:19 |
| Message-ID: | 20180818215219.GJ3326@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greetings,
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> writes:
> > This is a simple fix why push back ?
>
> What was being pushed back on, I think, was the claim that this needed to
> be back-patched. I'd be inclined not to, since (a) the message is not
> wrong, only less specific than it could be, and (b) people tend to get
> annoyed by unnecessary behavior changes in released branches.
>
> There might be an argument for putting it into v11, but not further back.
I tend to agree with this, and we don't need to add more work for
translators either, which I'm guessing this would. For v11 and HEAD, as
long as it doesn't make the code ugly, I do think it'd be good to be
more specific.
Thanks!
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2018-08-18 21:52:32 | Re: Fix for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW ownership error message |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-08-18 21:48:47 | Re: Fix for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW ownership error message |