> > The term "NOT_SET" makes me itch a little bit, even if there is an
> > existing parallel with OverridingKind. Perhaps your proposal is OK,
> > still how about "UNKNOWN" instead to use as term for the default?
> +1 to "UNKNOWN".
We currently use both UNKNOWN and NOT_SET in different places.
However, I'm okay with using UNKNOWN, and I've updated it in v16.
> But generally, classification in the PlannedStmtOrigin structure seems a
> little strange: a generic plan has a qualitative difference from any
> custom one. And any other plan also will be generic or custom, doesn't
> it?
I am not sure I understand the reasoning here. Can you provide more details/
specific examples?
--
Sami