> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 10 November 2005 15:38
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Andrew Dunstan; PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_proc.h
>
> "Dave Page" writes:
> > I vote for fixing t
"Dave Page" writes:
> I vote for fixing the file (but then I'm not doing the work).
> Unused_oids or whatevers it's called is fine, but it's still handy to be
> able to read the file easily.
Our convention is that hand-assigned OIDs are *globally* unique,
not just within the particular catalog.
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> contains the following:
> /* keep the following ordered by OID so that later changes can be made
> easier */
> which has manifestly not been followed. Should we fix the file or remove
> the second comment?
Reordering the file into strict OID order i
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Andrew Dunstan
> Sent: 10 November 2005 14:30
> To: PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: [HACKERS] pg_proc.h
>
>
> contains the following:
>
> /*
> * initial contents of pg_