> On Jul 1, 2021, at 18:57, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > But I wonder why > print the parent's OID, when we have access to its name.
Seems like a few people do schema-based multi-tenancy with similarly named relations in different namespaces, so I’d have a preference for OID over an unqualified relation name. Also the error message shows the OID for the toast relation so this is consistent. Relation name could work too though, especially if the schema was included -Jeremy Sent from my TI-83
