Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jGqGw-0000Wn-4c for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 20:35:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jGqGu-0006jy-F9 for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 20:35:36 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jGqGu-0006jh-7M for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 20:35:36 +0000 Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jGqGp-00084I-W0 for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 20:35:35 +0000 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BEF55C0203; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 16:35:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 16:35:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=xU6066B2/Ade2LQAlMA/liEnhPJ0xv6C4KtTLEZCA 70=; b=yE9+vpe7X05WLdQONfAKAOEFKJXZVAp2MdEf5IvpRtIrTstYYiYmf31YB AWwlxTyNDg4nYV5UzEzR8cseck3X6Px0Q/eKmHUbRRdaUjTsaWLuphCdfW298OFt ObwdRzYcbYiTcYen5FNR6R7c8J+yi8Uw17uvWMATeT22WRNP7BDzLcQ0j8zGOOCB 08qcfiGF1lXwx4IdxpZDm+AY/wu/kEaz/s/hqnKyeJX59uzHf+h7PGuzN/EGo9N9 8b1gxw+qbQPhkX94FAcZDtOi0lN62XgcjAC/bPulRt1O6eprGKKfilSZUCoKIXFO 6FuRoSIy+lxhdcmKpDjmnEROe7PBA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudehuddguddtjecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefuvfhfhfhokffffgggjggtgfesthejredttdefjeenucfhrhhomheprfgv thgvrhcugfhishgvnhhtrhgruhhtuceophgvthgvrhdrvghishgvnhhtrhgruhhtsedvnh guqhhurggurhgrnhhtrdgtohhmqeenucffohhmrghinhepvdhnughquhgrughrrghnthdr tghomhenucfkphepleefrddvgedvrddvudefrddvgedunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgvrhdrvghishgvnhhtrhgruhht sedvnhguqhhurggurhgrnhhtrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Received: from april.pezone.net (p5df2d5f1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.242.213.241]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CD41C3065C48; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 16:35:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: optionally schema-qualified for table_name To: Bruce Momjian , Tom Lane References: <158399268229.5708.13296960177949398026@wrigleys.postgresql.org> <20200322001310.GA2031@momjian.us> <22707.1584903901@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20200322201518.GB2031@momjian.us> <4628.1584915604@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20200323012757.GC2031@momjian.us> Cc: protodef@gmail.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org From: Peter Eisentraut Organization: 2ndQuadrant Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 21:35:25 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200323012757.GC2031@momjian.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On 2020-03-23 02:27, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 06:20:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Bruce Momjian writes: >>> On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 03:05:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>>> I don't really think this is an improvement, mainly because that >>>> error message is inventing a notation that we do not use in any >>>> other error message. >> >>> What do you suggest? The current message is: >> >>> Specify OWNED BY table.column or OWNED BY NONE. >> >> Yeah, and I think that's okay as-is, or at least we can't make it better >> without fairly whole-sale changes of our documentation practices. >> The fact that a table name can be schema-qualified is usually implicit, >> and I don't see why this place cries out for making it explicit >> more than other places. You could as well complain that there's >> nothing explicit here about double-quoting practices. > > OK, I will do just the documentation patch for this then. The same criticism applies to the documentation patch, I think. We don't usually make the schema part explicit. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services