On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 6:16 AM, David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 01:28:35PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/28/13 11:30 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes: > >>> Please find attached the latest patch. > >> > >> I remain of the opinion that this is simply a bad idea. It is unlike > >> our habits for constructing other types of nodes, and makes it harder > >> not easier to find all the places that need to be updated when adding > >> another field to FuncCall. > > > > I think it's a nice code cleanup. I don't understand your objection. > > Yeah, I was reading the patch thinking, yes, finally someone cleans that up.
Please find enclosed a patch reflecting the changes that de-reserved OVER as a keyword.
I have re-validated this new patch and it looks good to go in now.
I saw that it's already marked ready for committer.
This e-mail message (and any attachment) is intended for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. This message contains information from EnterpriseDB Corporation that may be privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or authorized to receive this for the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, retention, archiving, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message.
