"Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I am not real sure why the code is inconsistent about spelling the
>> second field's name differently in some of the structs, but it seems
>> like a bad idea --- as you've demonstrated, it invites confusion.
>> What would probably be better is a patch to rename exprno, rfno, etc
>> to all be called dno to make this connection more obvious.
> Attached. Passed regressions and basic testing.
Looks good, applied.
regards, tom lane