From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: strange error reporting
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 20:33:47 -0500
Message-ID: <798280.1611192827@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+Tgmobcfsh9jVdgiF+cUwtmbrdiLE8F9mt7a2J4yyO-ix1G1A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+TgmobssJ6rS22dspWnu-oDxXevGmhMD8VcRBjmj-b9UDqRjw@mail.gmail.com>
<717401.1611163169@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CA+Tgmoas37XHT48KjEb0zACCTxSTkba_VP-BDQAft-Mj5_5z_Q@mail.gmail.com>
<718535.1611164867@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CA+Tgmobcfsh9jVdgiF+cUwtmbrdiLE8F9mt7a2J4yyO-ix1G1A@mail.gmail.com>
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Maybe it would be better if it said:
>>> connection to database at socket "/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432" failed: FATAL:
>>> database "rhaas" does not exist
>> I'd be inclined to spell it "connection to server at ... failed",
>> but that sort of wording is surely also possible.
> "connection to server" rather than "connection to database" works for
> me; in fact, I think I like it slightly better.
If I don't hear any other opinions, I'll change these messages to
"connection to server at socket \"%s\" failed: "
"connection to server at \"%s\" (%s), port %s failed: "
(or maybe "server on socket"? "at" sounds right for the IP address
case, but it feels a little off in the socket pathname case.)
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com
Subject: Re: strange error reporting
In-Reply-To: <798280.1611192827@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox