On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 05:35:45PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 at 14:05, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Dec 18, 2025, at 03:51, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> > > I plan to push the attached version.
> > > <DO_SUBSCRIPTION_REL-v4.patch>
Pushed as d49936f etc.
> > 2
> > ```
> > + /* Sort by subscription name, since (namespace, name) match the rel */
> > ```
> >
> > This comment is correct, but sounds a little insider-ish. Maybe:
> >
> > /* Tiebreak by subscription name; (namespace, name) already identify the table */
>
> Similarly here too, it is inline with similar comments of other enums
> in this function.
Exactly. For cosmetics, consistency with nearby code is the stronger rule.