Re: [HACKERS] object description for FDW user mappings

2015-03-05 Thread Amit Langote
On 06-03-2015 AM 01:32, Tom Lane wrote: Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes: appendStringInfo(buffer, _(user mapping for %s in server %s), usename, srv-servername); +1 for the concept, but to be nitpicky, in doesn't seem like the right word

Re: [HACKERS] object description for FDW user mappings

2015-03-05 Thread Amit Langote
On 06-03-2015 AM 09:18, Amit Langote wrote: On 06-03-2015 AM 01:32, Tom Lane wrote: +1 for the concept, but to be nitpicky, in doesn't seem like the right word here. on server would read better to me; or perhaps at server. One more option may be for server (reading the doc for CREATE USER

Re: [HACKERS] object description for FDW user mappings

2015-03-05 Thread Amit Langote
On 06-03-2015 AM 09:30, Tom Lane wrote: Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes: One more option may be for server (reading the doc for CREATE USER MAPPING) Hm, but then you'd have user mapping for foo for server bar, which doesn't read so nicely either. Yeah, I had totally

Re: [HACKERS] object description for FDW user mappings

2015-03-05 Thread Tom Lane
Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes: By the way, in this case, is foo the name/id of a local user or does it really refer to some foo on the remote server? It's the name of a local user. I see your point that somebody might misread this as suggesting that it's a remote username,

Re: [HACKERS] object description for FDW user mappings

2015-03-05 Thread Tom Lane
Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes: On 06-03-2015 AM 01:32, Tom Lane wrote: +1 for the concept, but to be nitpicky, in doesn't seem like the right word here. on server would read better to me; or perhaps at server. One more option may be for server (reading the doc for CREATE

Re: [HACKERS] object description for FDW user mappings

2015-03-05 Thread David G Johnston
Tom Lane-2 wrote Amit Langote lt; Langote_Amit_f8@.co gt; writes: By the way, in this case, is foo the name/id of a local user or does it really refer to some foo on the remote server? It's the name of a local user. I see your point that somebody might misread this as suggesting that

Re: [HACKERS] object description for FDW user mappings

2015-03-05 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes: When commit cae565e503 introduced FDW user mappings, it used this in getObjectDescription for them: appendStringInfo(buffer, _(user mapping for %s), usename); This was later mostly copied (by yours truly) as object identity by commit

[HACKERS] object description for FDW user mappings

2015-03-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
When commit cae565e503 introduced FDW user mappings, it used this in getObjectDescription for them: appendStringInfo(buffer, _(user mapping for %s), usename); This was later mostly copied (by yours truly) as object identity by commit f8348ea32e wherein I used this: