Petr Jelinek <p...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 07/09/14 21:09, Andres Freund wrote: >> On 2014-09-07 15:05:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I think the main remaining issue is that we don't have consensus on >>> the function name AFAICT. I'm okay with using width_bucket(), as >>> is done in the latest patch, but there were objections ...
>> Just reread that part of the thread and personally I disliked all the >> other suggested names more than width_bucket. > Same here, that's why I didn't change it. Not hearing any further discussion, I committed it with that name (and a bit of further cleanup). regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers