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
