From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com>
cc: keeshd@keeshinds.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #19352: SQL Error messages do not include schema name along
 with table or data object name.
In-reply-to: 
 <CALdSSPhrTa8oqJpXm3TZVfkMUC5mgnFgrQXfs0chkjaG9YRu9Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <19352-51c017bf5177cadd@postgresql.org>
 <CALdSSPhrTa8oqJpXm3TZVfkMUC5mgnFgrQXfs0chkjaG9YRu9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com>
	message dated "Fri, 12 Dec 2025 14:00:52 +0500"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <994715.1765553995.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2025 10:39:55 -0500
Message-ID: <994716.1765553995@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/994716.1765553995%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2025 at 13:33, PG Bug reporting form
> <noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
>> Ideally this error message would be clearer if the schema name was included
>> with the data table or object name.

> So, if we do anything about this, we need to change all of these
> places... This is a big amount of work and would be HEAD-only.

Yeah, at a guess we'd be talking about touching a couple of thousand
places if we were to apply such a policy uniformly.  This has been
debated in the past and the answer has always come out "no"; not
just because of the work, but because it'd make errors more verbose
but frequently not more helpful.

As Álvaro notes nearby, we do have provisions for reporting associated
schema names as secondary error fields, although I think that's only
been implemented in a few dozen places.

			regards, tom lane