On 2014-11-21 10:12:40 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > I still think this change makes the error message more verbose, without > > any win in clarity. > > Can we agree that there should be consistency?
Consistency with what? Are you thinking of the messages in aclck.c:no_priv_msg? I don't think that's really comparable. A permission denied on a relation is much easier to understand than replication permissions and such. It'd surely not be better if pg_basebackup would a error message bar actually helpful information. Btw, the replication permission use in postinit.c isn't related to slots. > I'm not really particular about which way we go with the specific > wording (suggestions welcome..) but the inconsistency should be dealt > with. Meh. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
