On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:23 PM Haribabu Kommi
<kommi.haribabu@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