Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> writes: >> I think it's OK in HEAD. I agree we shouldn't do it like that >> in the back branches.
> Okay, I'll change this in back branches and HEAD to keep the code
> consistent, or do you think it is better to retain the order in HEAD
> as it is and just change it for back-branches?
As I said, I'd keep the natural ordering in HEAD.
regards, tom lane
