Re: A doubt about a newly added errdetail

At Wed, 28 Sep 2022 13:47:25 +0530, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 11:30 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I'm fine with that. By the way, related to the area, I found the
> > following error messages.
> >
> > > errmsg("publication \"%s\" is defined as FOR ALL TABLES",
> > > NameStr(pubform->pubname)),
> > > errdetail("Schemas cannot be added to or dropped from FOR ALL TABLES publications.")));
> >
> > It looks tome that the errmsg and errordetail are reversed. Isn't the following order common?
> >
> > > errmsg("schemas cannot be added to or dropped from publication \"%s\".",
> > > NameStr(pubform->pubname)),
> > > errdetail("The publication is defined as FOR ALL TABLES.")));
> >
>
> This one seems to be matching with the below existing message:
> ereport(ERROR,
> (errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE),
> errmsg("publication \"%s\" is defined as FOR ALL TABLES",
> NameStr(pubform->pubname)),
> errdetail("Tables cannot be added to or dropped from FOR ALL TABLES
> publications.")));

Yeah, so I meant that I'd like to propose to chage the both. I just
wanted to ask people whether that proposal is reasonable or not.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center