Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>> Maybe instead of the proposed patch, a notice could be added:
>> NOTICE: existing object was replaced
> Well, that would eliminate the backward-compatibility hazard, pretty
> much, but it seems noisy. I already find some of these notices to be
> unduly informative.
ROTFL ...
There has been some previous banter about reorganizing or reclassifying
the various NOTICE messages to make them more useful and/or less noisy;
but I don't think we've ever had a really concrete proposal for better
behavior. Maybe it's time to reopen that discussion.
I do agree with Peter's underlying point: it would be pretty
inconsistent for CREATE OR REPLACE to report this bit of info via
command tag when CREATE IF NOT EXISTS is reporting an absolutely
equivalent bit of info via elog(NOTICE).
regards, tom lane