On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 2:23 AM Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com> wrote: > I was looking at > Fix EXPLAIN ANALYZE for async-capable nodes.
Thanks for that!
> which adds the following parameter / field: > > + bool async_mode; /* true if node is in async mode */ > > async_mode implies an enum: {sync, async} > Since there are only two values, the data type is bool. I think it should be named is_async.
By async_mode, I mean "is in async mode?", as commented above. I thought the naming is_in_async_mode would be a bit long, so I shortened it to async_mode. IIUC, I think another example in our codebase would be the hash_spill_mode parameter in the AggState struct. So I think async_mode would be acceptable IMO.
Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
Hi,
Searching postgres codebase reveals the following (partial) examples:
bool is_varlena
bool is_leaf
I think these are more intuitive.
If you think is_in_async_mode is too long, how about naming the parameter is_async ?