Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Is there a good reason why RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE is 'P' not 'p'?
> I can't muster a lot of outrage about this one way or another. One
> possible advantage of 'P' is that there are fewer places where 'P' is
> mentioned in the source code than 'p'.
Hm, one would hope that the vast majority of code references are neither
of those, but rather "RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE". information_schema.sql
and system_views.sql will need to be gone over carefully, certainly, but
we shouldn't be hard-coding this anywhere that there's a reasonable
alternative.
regards, tom lane
