On Sun, Dec 21, 2025 at 9:42 AM Kirill Reshke <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 21 Dec 2025, 12:14 Tender Wang, <[email protected]> wrote: >> Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]> 于2025年12月20日周六 19:08写道： >>> I agree with you that ERRCODE_UNDEFINED_TABLE is certainly wrong error >>> code because the table actually exists. ERRCODE_WRONG_OBJECT_TYPE is >>> better. For example, we throw it when trying to attach a partition to >>> non-partitioned table. So, the parent table type is wrong. However, >>> are objects in the situation under consideration really have wrong >>> type? The problem is that one table is not partition of another. >>> However, it's possibly that they could be attached without changing of >>> their types. So, I think about >>> ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE. What do you think? >> >> >> It's ok for me. Please check the v2 patch. > > > Hi! Your v2 looks fine > The only question for me is, should we add any regression test to exercise > this code, or it is not worth the troubles?
I've checked contents of out regression tests. I see we very rarely include SQLSTATE there, mostly in psql and plpgsql tests. Thus, I think we should just fix the SQLSTATE without dedicating a test for that. So, I'm going to push the patch from Tender Wang if no objections. ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov Supabase
