Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > While reviewing the IF NOT EXISTS patch for CREATE USER MAPPING I > noticed that in several places we treat the user name as the name of the > user mapping. Strictly ISTM that user mappings are really anonymous > objects, so instead of something like user "mapping \"%s\" does not > exist for the server" we should possibly have "user mapping for user > \"%s\" does not exist for the server". I was about to make that change > in the patch when I saw that it was consistent with current usage. Do we > want to stick with the current usage where we treat the user name as the > mapping name, or change it?
Hmm, I vaguely recall that due to some previous discussion I changed some of uses of the former wording to your proposed one, which I agree is an improvement. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, 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
