On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:23 PM Haribabu Kommi <kommi.harib...@gmail.com> wrote: > access/relation.[c|h] name is fine. Or how about access/rel.[c|h], > because nodes/relation.h is related to planner. utils/rel.h is some how > related to relation caches.
Insofar as we can reasonably do so, I'd rather pick unique names for header files. I know that there's no law that rules out having both nodes/relation.h and access/relation.h, or likewise utils/rel.h and access/rel.h; the computer won't be confused. But it might create some confusion among human beings, so my vote is for avoiding that sort of thing if we can. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
