On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 06:35:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Sami Imseih <[email protected]> writes: >> While looking at this, I realized that "PqMsg_Progress" is the name of the >> 'P' message that was added for parallel index progress reporting. > >> I missed [1] at the time, but if there is still a chance to rename it to >> "PqMsg_ParallelWorkerProgress", that seems better, >> "PqMsg_Progress" does not really describe what it is, whereas >> "PqMsg_ParallelWorkerProgress" makes it explicit that this is a >> parallel-worker-to-leader message. It also matches other places in the code >> that deal with parallel workers, such as "IsParallelWorker", so it is easier >> to find when looking through parallel-worker code. > > Yeah, "PqMsg_Progress" seems unduly generic. I don't think we should > rename it in the back branches, but doing so in master looks like > it'd be a small-footprint change.
All of the options I've seen listed in this thread so far involve changing the part after the PqMsg_ prefix, but given we now have PqReplMsg_ and PqBackupMsg_, I'm thinking it'd be better to give parallel worker messages their own prefix. That seems to act as a sort of class or namespace for the message. Maybe something like PqParallelMsg_Progress would work here. -- nathan
