On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 4:55 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fuj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Bharath, > > On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 6:37 PM Bharath Rupireddy > <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 for rewording the comments. Here are my thoughts on the patch: > > > > 1) Just to be consistent(we are using this word in the error message, > > and in other comments around there), how about > > + * Determine whether to try to reestablish the connection. > > instead of > > + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later. > > Actually, we use the word “remake” as well in comments in > connection.c: e.g., “If the connection needs to be *remade* due to > invalidation, disconnect as soon as we're out of all transactions.” in > GetConnection(). But I don’t have a strong opinion about that, so > I’ll change the word as proposed.
Thanks. > > 2) Just to be consistent, how about > > + * cases where we're starting new transaction (not subtransaction), > > if a broken connection is > > instead of > > + * cases where we're out of all transactions, if a broken connection is > > Actually, I modified the comment to match existing comments like the > one mentioned above. I think the patch would actually be more > consistent. Okay. > > 3) IMO we don't need the word "later" here because we are immediately > > reestablishing the connection, if it is decided to do so. > > + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later. > > Ok, I’ll drop the word “later”. Thanks. Regards, Bharath Rupireddy.
