On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 03:34:08PM +0000, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> * I'm not sure I understand the need for 0001. Wasn't there an earlier
> version of this patch that just did it by re-populating the type
> array, but which still had it as an array rather than turning it into
> a list? Making it a list falsifies some of the comments and
> function/variable name choices in that file.
This part is from me.
I can review the names if it's desired , but it'd be fine to fall back to the
earlier patch. I thought a pglist was cleaner, but it's not needed.
--
Justin