Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > I think changing type oid macro names is somewhat problematic - in > contrast to function oid macros the type macros are much more likely to > be used by client applications, e.g. for deciding whether to use binary > or text format for a type.
> A quick code search shows a few references, even just within debian > packages (some are incorrect hits, others aren't): > https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=CASHOID&literal=1&perpkg=1 Yeah, I can easily believe that for CASHOID in particular. So I'm okay with keeping that available as a handmade alias. The other extant oid_symbol entries are PGNODETREEOID PGNDISTINCTOID PGDEPENDENCIESOID PGMCVLISTOID PGDDLCOMMANDOID LSNOID EVTTRIGGEROID The only one of these that client code would plausibly be using is LSNOID, and even that is a bit of a stretch. Moreover, this clearly shows the effect John mentioned that people have been copying the style of adjacent entries rather than making use of the standard oid_symbol convention like they should --- some of these don't exist in the initial v11 version of pg_type.dat. I'd suggest keeping CASHOID and LSNOID available as aliases, and renaming the rest. regards, tom lane
