On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 5:12 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 4:01 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> The primary error message is not varying, only the DETAIL/HINT, so
> >> I find this concern pretty far-fetched. Also, I believe that the
> >> case that the message intends to help with is very common and so
> >> it will save a lot of people time, more than enough to outweigh
> >> any cases where it's perhaps un-optimal.
>
> > I'm not entirely convinced, but you could well be right. I do like all
> > the other detailed diagnostics, I think, I just wasn't sure about that
> > one. But I'm not really here to argue, just giving my opinion.
>
> Fair enough. Again, how shall we proceed? What I suggest is to
> go ahead and push what I have, and if there's anything that's not
> so great, hopefully we'll get feedback about it before v19 is
> frozen.
Seems reasonable. I don't see that anyone is strongly objecting. In
fact, I think everyone who has commented has been generally in favor,
just with various minor concerns here and there. And it's certainly
better to put stuff that might need some fine-tuning into the tree
sooner rather than later.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
