Re: More protocol.h replacements this time into walsender.c
| От | Dave Cramer |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: More protocol.h replacements this time into walsender.c |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CADK3HHLmF2XYsqtSonn-tTHmtYdrOgsoVTXiVDSEf01Far2-cg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: More protocol.h replacements this time into walsender.c (Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: More protocol.h replacements this time into walsender.c
Re: More protocol.h replacements this time into walsender.c |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 24 Jul 2025 at 17:05, Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 12:04 PM Dave Cramer <davecramer@gmail.com> wrote:
> Patch attached
+/* 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
+/* These are the codes sent by the frontend and backend. */
+
+#define PqMsg_PasswordMessage 'p'
+
+/* These are the codes sent by the frontend and backend. */
Is this change intended?
It was as it lines up with the others at least in my editor.
I'm not married to it.
Dave
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: