Re: pg_proc.h

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_proc.h
Date: 2005-11-10 15:38:05
Message-ID: 9222.1131637085@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> 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. This means you *must* use
unused_oids to find a free OID; eyeballing the catalog listing isn't
enough, even if it were in strict order.

Given that, I think "readability" really consists in keeping related
functions together. If we were going to do any wholesale reordering,
I'd want to see it done with an eye to sorting the functions into
logical groups, not a blind numeric sort.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2005-11-10 15:41:34 Re: [HACKERS] win32 8.1 pgadmin dll issues
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-11-10 15:27:53 Re: pg_proc.h