Gavin Sherry wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Feb 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Comments, objections? Also, any thoughts about the names to use for
>> these new node types? As I commented last year, I'm not completely
>> happy with "TopPlan" because it won't actually be a subtype of Plan,
>> but I don't have a better idea. Also I'm unsure what to call the
>> cut-down RangeTblEntry struct; maybe RunTimeRangeTblEntry?
>
> I think TopPlan is misleading. What about MetaPlan instead of TopPlan? I
> think RunTimeRangeTblEntry is okay, though long. ExecRangeTblEntry?
>
Would ExecPlan be better? - matches ExecRangeTblEntry.
Cheers
Mark
