Re: [v9.2] DROP Reworks Part.1 - Consolidate routines to handle DropStmt
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [v9.2] DROP Reworks Part.1 - Consolidate routines to handle DropStmt |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1309986159-sup-3031@alvh.no-ip.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [v9.2] DROP Reworks Part.1 - Consolidate routines to handle DropStmt (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [v9.2] DROP Reworks Part.1 - Consolidate routines to
handle DropStmt
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 06 14:02:13 -0400 2011: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 06 12:40:39 -0400 2011: > > > >> This patch removes an impressive amount of boilerplate code and > >> replaces it with something much more compact. I like that. In the > >> interest of full disclosure, I suggested this approach to KaiGai at > >> PGCon, so I'm biased: but even so, I'm pleasantly surprised by the > >> amount of consolidation that appears possible here. > > > > Yeah. Myself, I love the fact that the dropmsgstrings thing is gone. I > > wonder if the routine to obtain "foo doesn't exist, skipping" messages > > could be replaced by judicious use of getObjectDescription. > > I've been told we don't want to go further in that direction for > reasons of translatability. Well, you can split sentences using a colon instead of building them; something likeerrmsg("object cannot be found, skipping: %s", getObjectDescription(object)) which renders asobject cannot be found, skipping: table foobar Now people can complain that these messages are "worse" than the originals which were more specific in nature, but I don't personally see a problem with that. I dunno what's the general opinion though. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: