Re: Improve the granularity of PQsocketPoll's timeout parameter?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Tristan Partin <tristan(at)partin(dot)io>, Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Improve the granularity of PQsocketPoll's timeout parameter?
Date: 2024-06-12 19:00:03
Message-ID: 1513278.1718218803@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 2:25 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> "PG" as a prefix for typedefs in libpq-fe.h is a pretty ancient
>> precedent. I'm not wedded to any of the rest of it --- do you
>> have a better idea?

> Hmm, well, one thing I notice is that most of the other typedefs in
> src/interfaces/libpq seem to do PGWordsLikeThis or PGwordsLikeThis
> rather than PGwords_like_this. There are a few that randomly do
> pg_words_like_this, too. But I know of no specific precedent for how a
> microsecond type should be named.

Hmm ... pg_int64 is the only such typedef I'm seeing in that file.
But okay, it's a precedent. The thing I'm having difficulty with
is that I'd like the typedef name to allude to time_t, and I don't
think fooling with the casing of that will be helpful in making
the allusion stick. So how about one of

pg_usec_time_t
pg_time_t_usec

?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2024-06-12 19:07:16 Re: RFC: adding pytest as a supported test framework
Previous Message Andres Freund 2024-06-12 18:48:35 Re: On disable_cost