Hello Peter, On Sun, Oct 25, 2026 at 9:39 PM Peter Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In summary, FWIW, I felt the existing message is adequate and might be > better left alone. It's not perfect, but I think the caret is doing > the job well enough. The patch HINT in particular introduces new > problems. If you still want to include the name in the DETAIL, then > you might need to address the quoting problem first (e.g. by wording > it so it doesn't look like an identifier), but I'm not sure it's worth > it. Thanks for the review. Fair points, especially the ALTER PUBLICATION case, where the HINT would be wrong. The caret does show where it went wrong, and I don't have a case where it isn't enough. I'll withdraw this. Thank you again. Thanks, Baji Shaik
