Re: Misleading error message in logical decoding for binary plugins
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Misleading error message in logical decoding for binary plugins |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaODBCE0McwWLPK0BpwzeMgg+Tjmd7ph4yOxh5+xkmQew@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Misleading error message in logical decoding for binary plugins (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Misleading error message in logical decoding for
binary plugins
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> >> Maybe: >> >> >> >> ERROR: pg_logical_slot_peek_changes cannot be used with a plugin that >> >> produces only binary output >> >> HINT: Use pg_logical_slot_peek_binary_changes instead. >> > >> > That level has no knowledge of what it's used by, so I think that'd >> > require bigger changes than worth it. >> >> ERROR: this logical decoding plugin can only produce binary output >> ERROR: logical decoding plugin "%s" can only produce binary output > > ERROR: logical decoding plugin "%s" produces binary output, but sink only copes with textual data > > Not sure about 'sink'. Maybe 'receiving side' or 'receiver'? > > Not 100% sure if the name is available in that site, but if not it can > be left of without hurting much. I was trying to avoid mentioning the word "sink" because we don't actually have a real term for that. From the user's perspective, it's not going to be obvious that the function they invoked is the sink or receiver; to them, it's just an interface - if anything, it's a *sender* of the changes to them. In case I lose that argument, please at least write "allows" instead of "copes with"; the latter I think is too informal for an error message. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: