From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Logical Replication - improve error message while adding tables to the publication in check_publication_add_relation |
Date: | 2021-03-26 03:55:11 |
Message-ID: | CALj2ACVKE0j5Wz4Uj_eGJczO17K5rEfTtyvVvx_90cH5V+QURw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 8:26 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 5:48 PM Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021, at 2:14 AM, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> >
> > While providing thoughts on [1], I observed that the error messages
> > that are emitted while adding foreign, temporary and unlogged tables
> > can be improved a bit from the existing [2] to [3]. For instance, the
> > existing message when foreign table is tried to add into the
> > publication "f1" is not a table" looks odd. Because it says that the
> > foreign table is not a table at all.
> >
> > I wouldn't mix [regular|partitioned|temporary|unlogged] tables with foreign
> > tables. Although, they have a pg_class entry in common, foreign tables aren't
> > "real" tables (external storage); they even have different DDLs to handle it
> > (CREATE TABLE x CREATE FOREIGN TABLE).
> >
> > postgres=# CREATE PUBLICATION testpub FOR TABLE f1;
> > ERROR: "f1" is not a table
> > DETAIL: Only tables can be added to publications.
> >
> > I agree that "f1 is not a table" is a confusing message at first because
> > foreign table has "table" as description. Maybe if we apply the negation in
> > both messages it would be clear (using the same wording as system tables).
> >
> > ERROR: "f1" is a foreign table
> > DETAIL: Foreign tables cannot be added to publications.
>
> Thanks. Changed the error message and detail to the way we have it for
> system tables presently. Attaching v2 patch for further review.
Here's the v3 patch rebased on the latest master.
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v3-0001-Improve-error-message-while-adding-tables-to-publ.patch | application/octet-stream | 6.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-03-26 04:01:05 | Re: [UNVERIFIED SENDER] Re: Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transaction id (XID)? |
Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2021-03-26 03:53:58 | Re: Get memory contexts of an arbitrary backend process |