On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 1:17 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Mmm ... maybe. I think those of us who are native English speakers > may overrate the intelligibility of SQL keywords to those who aren't. > So I'm inclined to feel that preserving translatability of the > role property descriptions is a good thing. But it'd be good to > hear comments on that point from people who actually use it.
+1 for comments from people who use it. My thought was that such people probably need to interpret LOGIN and NOLOGIN into their preferred language either way, but if \du displays something else, then they also need to mentally construct a reverse mapping, from whatever string is showing up there to the corresponding SQL syntax. The current display has that problem even for English speakers -- you have to know that "Cannot login" corresponds to "NOLOGIN" and that "No connections" corresponds to "CONNECTION LIMIT 0" and so forth. No matter what we put there, if it's English or Turkish or Hindi rather than SQL, you have to try to figure out what the displayed text corresponds to at the SQL level in order to fix anything that isn't the way you want it to be, or to recreate the configuration on another instance. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
