Re: Operator class group proposal

Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Operator Superclass ?

Yeah, I thought about that too, but I don't like it much ... can't
entirely put my finger on why not, except that class/superclass usually
implies that the objects you're talking about are all the same kind of
thing, whereas what we have here is a very definite distinction between
two kinds of objects.  On the same grounds, I'd object to calling
schemas "directories" or "folders", unless they could be nested.
        regards, tom lane