On 2025-Jul-24, Dave Cramer wrote: > On Thu, 24 Jul 2025 at 17:05, Jacob Champion < > jacob.champ...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 12:04 PM Dave Cramer <davecra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +/* Replication Protocol sent by the primary */ > > + > > +#define PqMsg_XlogData 'w' > > +#define PqMsg_PrimaryKeepAlive 'k' > > +#define PqMsg_PrimaryStatusUpdate 's' > > + > > + > > +/* Replication Protocol sent by the standby */ > > + > > +#define PqMsg_StandbyStatus 'r' > > +#define PqMsg_HotStandbyFeedback 'h' > > +#define PqMsg_RequestPrimaryStatus 'p' > > > > Since these are part of the replication subprotocol (i.e. tunneled, > > via CopyData) rather than the top-level wire protocol, do they deserve > > their own prefix? PqReplMsg_* maybe? > > I'm going to wait to see if there are any other opinions. Last time I did > this there were quite a few opinions before finally settling on the naming Count me in. -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "The Postgresql hackers have what I call a "NASA space shot" mentality. Quite refreshing in a world of "weekend drag racer" developers." (Scott Marlowe)
