From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: dubious error message from partition.c |
Date: | 2017-08-09 18:56:12 |
Message-ID: | CAEZATCWZXos_+n41HiRkJ8sAhDaJ7Tv_JsZAr=JgrjDA81HAcg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9 August 2017 at 13:03, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> A small suggestion is that it'd be better to write it like "Specified
>> upper bound \"%s\" precedes lower bound \"%s\"." I think "succeeds" has
>> more alternate meanings than "precedes", so the wording you have seems
>> more confusing than it needs to be. (Of course, the situation could be
>> the opposite in other languages, but translators have the ability to
>> reverse the ordering if they need to.)
>
> I think that doesn't quite work, because the failure is caused by LB
> <= UB, not LB < UB. We could fix that by writing "precedes or equals"
> but that seems lame. Maybe:
>
> Lower bound %s does not precede upper bound %s.
>
There was an earlier suggestion to use "greater than or equal to". I
think that would work quite well:
ERROR: invalid range bounds for partition \"%s\"
DETAIL: lower bound %s is greater than or equal to upper bound %s.
Regards,
Dean
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2017-08-09 19:25:56 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recently added wait events |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-08-09 18:46:18 | Re: Crash report for some ICU-52 (debian8) COLLATE and work_mem values |