Re: Bizarre choice of case for RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bizarre choice of case for RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE
Date: 2017-03-07 23:31:26
Message-ID: 4e832b41-a53c-907c-4ece-a4796590d1f5@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3/7/17 12:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> Is there a good reason why RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE is 'P' not 'p'?

I was confused about this too. If there is no argument against it, I
would favor changing it.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2017-03-07 23:31:27 Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API
Previous Message Mark Dilger 2017-03-07 23:27:12 Re: cast result of copyNode()