On 2021/07/27 15:06, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
Thanks for the v8 patch, it LGTM.
Pushed. Thanks!
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 9:37 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
> +
> +non-negative
> +
> +Do not use non-negative word in error messages as it looks
> +ambiguous. Instead, use foo must be an integer value greater than
> +zero or foo must be an integer value greater than or equal
> +to
On 2021/07/26 13:56, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 7:54 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 10:11 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 9:20 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
+
+ Avoid Using non-negative Word in Error
Messages
+
+
+Do not
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 7:54 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 10:11 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 9:20 PM Fujii Masao
> > wrote:
> > > +
> > > + Avoid Using non-negative Word in Error
> > > Messages
> > > +
> > > +
> > > +Do not
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 10:11 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 9:20 PM Fujii Masao
> wrote:
> > +
> > + Avoid Using non-negative Word in Error
> > Messages
> > +
> > +
> > +Do not use non-negative word in error messages as it
> > looks
> > +ambiguous. Inst
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 9:20 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
> +
> + Avoid Using non-negative Word in Error
> Messages
> +
> +
> +Do not use non-negative word in error messages as it looks
> +ambiguous. Instead, use foo must be an integer value greater than
> zero
> +or foo must be an
On 2021/07/09 11:41, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
PSA v6 patch.
Thanks for updating the patch!
+
+ Avoid Using non-negative Word in Error
Messages
+
+
+Do not use non-negative word in error messages as it looks
+ambiguous. Instead, use foo must be an integer value greater than
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 6:25 AM Fujii Masao wrote:
> The patch could not be applied cleanly because of recent commit d854720df6.
> Could you rebase the patch?
Thanks. Done.
> - /* these must have a non-negative numeric value */
> + /* these must have a
On 2021/05/26 15:22, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 2:43 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
Thanks. That looks better. PSA v4 patch.
Attaching v5 patch rebased on latest master.
The patch could not be applied cleanly because of recent commit d854720df6.
Could you rebase the p
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 2:43 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> Thanks. That looks better. PSA v4 patch.
Attaching v5 patch rebased on latest master.
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
v5-0001-Disambiguate-error-messages-that-use-non-negative.patch
Descript
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 1:44 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Wed, 19 May 2021 21:48:56 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote in
> > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 5:20 PM Fujii Masao
> > wrote:
> > > I'm fine to convert "non-negative" word to "greater than" or "greater than
> > > or equal to" in the me
At Wed, 19 May 2021 21:48:56 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote in
> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 5:20 PM Fujii Masao
> wrote:
> > I'm fine to convert "non-negative" word to "greater than" or "greater than
> > or equal to" in the messages. But this change also seems to get rid of
> > the information ab
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 5:20 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> ereport(ERROR,
>
> (errcode(ERRCODE_SYNTAX_ERROR),
> -errmsg("%s requires a
> non-negative numeric value",
> +
On 2021/05/19 20:01, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 4:23 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 7:39 PM Tom Lane wrote:
Bharath Rupireddy writes:
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 12:00 PM Tom Lane wrote:
Yea
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 4:23 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 7:39 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > >
> > > Bharath Rupireddy writes:
> > > > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 12:00 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > > >> Yeah, this error me
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 7:39 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Bharath Rupireddy writes:
> > > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 12:00 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Yeah, this error message seems outright buggy. However, it's a minor
> > >> matter. Als
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 7:39 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Bharath Rupireddy writes:
> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 12:00 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Yeah, this error message seems outright buggy. However, it's a minor
> >> matter. Also, some people think "positive" is the same thing as
> >> "non-negative",
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 10:09:40AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bharath Rupireddy writes:
>> if (value < 0) "requires a zero or positive integer value"
>> if (value <= 0) "requires a positive integer value"
>
> I was thinking of avoiding the passive voice and writing
>
> "foo must be greater t
Bharath Rupireddy writes:
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 12:00 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, this error message seems outright buggy. However, it's a minor
>> matter. Also, some people think "positive" is the same thing as
>> "non-negative", so maybe we need less ambiguous wording?
> Since value 0 ca
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 12:00 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Fujii Masao writes:
> > +1 for the change of the error messages.
>
> Yeah, this error message seems outright buggy. However, it's a minor
> matter. Also, some people think "positive" is the same thing as
> "non-negative", so maybe we need les
Fujii Masao writes:
> +1 for the change of the error messages.
Yeah, this error message seems outright buggy. However, it's a minor
matter. Also, some people think "positive" is the same thing as
"non-negative", so maybe we need less ambiguous wording?
> One question is; should we back-patch t
On 2021/05/10 10:26, tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com wrote:
From: houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
So, is it better to change the error message to “fetch_size requires a positive
integer value” ?
I also found fetch_size has the similar issue, attaching a patch to fix this.
I have a faint memory that I
From: houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> So, is it better to change the error message to “fetch_size requires a
> positive integer value” ?
> I also found fetch_size has the similar issue, attaching a patch to fix this.
I have a faint memory that I fixed them after receiving the same feedback from
someo
On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 9:09 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> The error message here seems not accurate, because
>
> I can see from the code batch_size should be positive ( > 0).
>
> So, is it better to change the error message to “fetch_size requires a
> positive integer value” ?
>
> I also
24 matches
Mail list logo
