| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
|---|
| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | that picksplit debug message again |
| Date: | 2009-06-23 23:28:43 |
| Message-ID: | 200906240228.44473.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Is the %d actually in the right place here?
errmsg("picksplit method for %d column of index \"%s\" failed",
attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r))
And later in the file there is this, which might have the same problem:
elog(LOG, "PickSplit method of %d columns of index '%s' doesn't support
secondary split",
attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r));
| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: that picksplit debug message again |
| Date: | 2009-06-24 05:19:11 |
| Message-ID: | 19621.1245820751@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Is the %d actually in the right place here?
> errmsg("picksplit method for %d column of index \"%s\" failed",
> attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r))
No, any native speaker of English would say "for column %d". Putting
"failed" at the end seems a bit awkward as well, though I can't offhand
see a better phrasing. "picksplit method failed for ..." is *not*
better; it implies there is only one picksplit method for everything,
whereas the point of the message is that the one associated with this
column failed.
> And later in the file there is this, which might have the same problem:
> elog(LOG, "PickSplit method of %d columns of index '%s' doesn't support
> secondary split",
> attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r));
Should be "for column %d" also, AFAICS, plus '' -> "" and lowercase
"PickSplit" ... but this message isn't translatable anyway as an elog().
regards, tom lane
| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: that picksplit debug message again |
| Date: | 2009-06-25 09:36:06 |
| Message-ID: | 1245922566.4038.62.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 01:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Is the %d actually in the right place here?
> > errmsg("picksplit method for %d column of index \"%s\" failed",
> > attno + 1, RelationGetRelationName(r))
>
> No, any native speaker of English would say "for column %d". Putting
> "failed" at the end seems a bit awkward as well, though I can't offhand
> see a better phrasing. "picksplit method failed for ..." is *not*
> better; it implies there is only one picksplit method for everything,
> whereas the point of the message is that the one associated with this
> column failed.
"has failed"?
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support