On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 10:58:37PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
>> Thanks. The only thing that stands out to me is the name of the parallel
>> leader/worker protocol message. In the original thread for protocol
>> characters, some early versions of the patch called it a "parallel
>> progress" message, but this new one just calls it PqMsg_Progress. I guess
>> PqMsg_ParallelProgress might be a tad more descriptive and less likely to
>> cause naming collisions with new frontend/backend messages, but I'm not
>> tremendously worried about either of those things. Thoughts?
>
> Personally I'm fine with either option.
Alright. Well, I guess I'll flip a coin tomorrow unless someone else
chimes in with an opinion.
--
nathan