From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: and it's not a bunny rabbit, either |
Date: | 2010-12-29 21:53:47 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimv9-6ebLQmo=p47nbjVxdL_S4vhnD-h-3pwZ84@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On 29.12.2010 06:54, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> With the patch:
>>
>> rhaas=# cluster v;
>> ERROR: views do not support CLUSTER
>
> "do not support" sounds like a missing feature, rather than a nonsensical
> command. How about something like "CLUSTER cannot be used on views"
In the latest version of this patch, I created four translatable
strings per object type:
<blats> do not support %s (where %s is an SQL command)
<blats> do not support constraints
<blats> do not support rules
<blats> do not support triggers
It's reasonable enough to write "CLUSTER cannot be used on views", but
does "constraints cannot be used on views" seems more awkward to me.
Or do we think that's OK?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-12-29 22:01:12 | Upgrading Extension, version numbers (was: Extensions, patch v16) |
Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-12-29 21:34:52 | Re: Extensions, patch v16 |