"Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com> writes:
> FWIW, I bumped around the Internet and looked at Oracle docs to see if
> there's any reason why minscale() might not be a good function name.
> I couldn't find any problems.
> I also couldn't think of a better name than trim_scale() and don't
> have any problems with the name.
I'd just comment that it seems weird that the same patch is introducing
two functions with inconsistently chosen names. Why does one have
an underscore separating the words and the other not? I haven't got
a large investment in either naming convention specifically, but it'd
be nice if we could at least pretend to be considering consistency.
regards, tom lane