> -----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" <dpage@vale-housing.co.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.
Yes, I realise that, my point was that unused_oids doesn't make the file more readable. > 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. That makes sense for groups of functions, but one-offs, or ones that are not easily categorised will just end up being dumped anywhere in there. You hack that file *far* more than I do though, so I can't really argue against what you think would be most convenient. Regards, Dave. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org