Re: Obsolete reference to pg_relation in comment - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: Obsolete reference to pg_relation in comment
Date
Msg-id 20230726191153.GA3315838@nathanxps13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Obsolete reference to pg_relation in comment  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 11:53:06AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 06:48:51PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> Triggered by a discussion on IRC, I noticed that there's a stray
>> reference to pg_relation in a comment that was added long after it was
>> renamed to pg_class.  Here's a patch to bring that up to speed.
> 
>> pg_relation was renamed to pg_class in 1991, but this comment (added
>> in 2004) missed the memo
> 
> Huh, interesting!  I dug around the Berkeley archives [0] and found
> comments indicating that pg_relation was renamed to pg_class in Februrary
> 1990.  However, it looks like the file was named pg_relation.h until
> Postgres95 v0.01, which has the following comment in pg_class.h:
> 
>      *    ``pg_relation'' is being replaced by ``pg_class''.  currently
>      *    we are only changing the name in the catalogs but someday the
>      *    code will be changed too. -cim 2/26/90
>      *    [it finally happens.  -ay 11/5/94]

This comment actually lived in Postgres until 9cf80f2 (June 2000), too.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: incremental-checkopints
Next
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: incremental-checkopints