On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 3:17 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2. > @@ -213,6 +213,7 @@ typedef enum BuiltinTrancheIds > LWTRANCHE_WAL_INSERT, > LWTRANCHE_BUFFER_CONTENT, > LWTRANCHE_BUFFER_IO_IN_PROGRESS, > + LWTRANCHE_PROC, > LWTRANCHE_FIRST_USER_DEFINED > } BuiltinTrancheIds; > > Other trancheids are based on the name of their corresponding > LWLock, don't you think it is better to name it as > LWTRANCHE_BACKEND for the sake of consistency? Also consider > changing name at other places in patch for this tranche.
Hmm, don't think I agree with this. I think LWTRANCHE_PROC is better. Remember, backendLock is intended to distinguish that object from everything else in the PGPROC; but here we're trying to distinguish stuff in the PGPROC from stuff in other data structures altogether. That's an important distinction. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
