Re: [PATCH] Fix incorrect range in pg_regress comment - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jelte Fennema-Nio
Subject Re: [PATCH] Fix incorrect range in pg_regress comment
Date
Msg-id CAGECzQTu+z8Bpau1QU7tRyj3bTBhzZfE-kdDA8SK7hrm1sBVSg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Fix incorrect range in pg_regress comment  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 at 22:26, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Hmm, our convention is definitely that the numbers start with 1,
> so I do not want to make this change.  Maybe we should change
> the code instead.

That would require any extensions that use the _0.out suffix to update
all those files to use _1.out as the suffix. One such extension is
Citus[1]. That seems like unnecessary extension churn with little
benefit. So my vote would be to update the comment (as is done in
patch v1).

[1]: https://github.com/citusdata/citus/blob/main/src/test/regress/expected/columnar_lz4_0.out



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix incorrect range in pg_regress comment
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Using Expanded Objects other than Arrays from plpgsql