> On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 at 16:50, Tatsuo Ishii <is...@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > >> > On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 04:02:08PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> >> Dave Cramer <davecra...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 at 12:59, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>>> PqMsgEmptyQueryResponse or something like that seems better, if we >> >>>> want to keep the current capitalization. I'm not a huge fan of the way >> >>>> we vary our capitalization conventions so much all over the code base, >> >>>> but I think we would at least do well to keep it consistent from one >> >>>> end of a certain identifier to the other. >> >> >> >>> I don't have a strong preference, but before I make the changes I'd >> like to >> >>> get consensus. >> >>> Can we vote or whatever it takes to decide on a naming pattern that is >> >>> acceptable ? >> >> >> >> I'm good with Robert's proposal above. >> > >> > +1 >> >> +1. >> >> Also we need to decide what to do with them: >> >> > #define PQMSG_REQ_PREPARED 'S' >> > #define PQMSG_REQ_PORTAL 'P' >> >> If we go "PqMsgEmptyQueryResponse", probably we should go something >> like for these? >> >> #define PqMsgReqPrepared 'S' >> #define PqMsgReqPortal 'P' >> > > I went with PqMsgPortalSubCommand and PqMsgPreparedSubCommand > > See attached patch
Looks good to me. Best reagards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS LLC English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/ Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
