"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it at all a problem that several columns in pg_conversion have the same
> name as columns in pg_constraint?
> Should the ones in pg_conversion become: convname instead of conname, etc.
> simply for clarity?
Perhaps so. The two patches were developed independently and so no one
thought about it. I don't have a strong feeling about which set of
names to change, although perhaps pg_conversion is referenced in fewer
places at the moment.
Tatsuo, any opinions?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
