Re: More protocol.h replacements this time into walsender.c

On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 05:39:14PM -0400, Dave Cramer wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2025 at 17:05, Jacob Champion <
> jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> 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

+1 to a new prefix.  I don't have any strong opinions on the exact choice,
though.  PqReplMsg, ReplMsg, PqMsg_Repl, etc. seem like some obvious
options.

-- 
nathan