From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Refactor pqformat.{c,h} and protocol.h |
Date: | 2024-07-16 19:48:34 |
Message-ID: | ZpbOknZUTGZ8G5Vx@nathan |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 09:14:35PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
>> As discussed elsewhere [0], we can add the leader/worker protocol
>> characters to protocol.h, but they should probably go in a separate
>> section. I'd recommend breaking that part out to a separate patch, too.
>
> OK, here is the updated patchset. This time I chose not to include this patch:
Thanks. The only thing that stands out to me is the name of the parallel
leader/worker protocol message. In the original thread for protocol
characters, some early versions of the patch called it a "parallel
progress" message, but this new one just calls it PqMsg_Progress. I guess
PqMsg_ParallelProgress might be a tad more descriptive and less likely to
cause naming collisions with new frontend/backend messages, but I'm not
tremendously worried about either of those things. Thoughts?
--
nathan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2024-07-16 19:58:37 | Re: [PATCH] Refactor pqformat.{c,h} and protocol.h |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2024-07-16 19:33:55 | Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates |