| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: patch: improve "user mapping not found" error message |
| Date: | 2023-11-23 08:41:14 |
| Message-ID: | 84e1470b-5c5d-46f8-a623-b6a2350ca2b3@eisentraut.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 20.11.23 02:25, Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
> 2023年7月3日(月) 18:22 Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>:
>>
>> On 23.06.23 09:45, Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
>>> if (!HeapTupleIsValid(tp))
>>> + {
>>> + ForeignServer *server = GetForeignServer(serverid);
>>> +
>>> ereport(ERROR,
>>> (errcode(ERRCODE_UNDEFINED_OBJECT),
>>> - errmsg("user mapping not found for \"%s\"",
>>> - MappingUserName(userid))));
>>> + errmsg("user mapping not found for user \"%s\", server \"%s\"",
>>> + MappingUserName(userid),
>>> + server->servername)));
>>> + }
>>
>> What if the foreign server does not exist either? Then this would show
>> a "cache lookup failed" error message, which I think we should avoid.
>>
>> There is existing logic for handling this in
>> get_object_address_usermapping().
>
> Apologies, missed this response somewhere. Does the attached fix that?
Hmm, now that I look at this again, under what circumstances would the
server not be found? Maybe the first patch was right and it should give
a "scary" error in that case, instead of just omitting it.
In any case, this patch appears to be missing an update in the
postgres_fdw test output.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Maxim Orlov | 2023-11-23 08:43:41 | Re: How to stop autovacuum silently |
| Previous Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2023-11-23 08:19:51 | Re: [PATCH] Add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in scram_SaltedPassword loop. |