On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 4:13 PM Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat....@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 6:00 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > + */ > > + ReorderBufferUpdateProgressCB update_progress; > > > > Are you suggesting changing the name of the above variable? If so, how > > about apply_progress, progress, or updateprogress? If you don't like > > any of these then feel free to suggest something else. If we change > > the variable name then accordingly, we need to update > > ReorderBufferUpdateProgressCB as well. > > > > I would liked to have all the callback names renamed with prefix > "rbcb_xxx" so that they have very less chances of conflicting with > similar names in the code base. But it's probably late to do that :). > > How are update_txn_progress since the CB is supposed to be used only > within a transaction? or update_progress_txn? >
Personally, I would prefer 'apply_progress' as it would be similar to a few other callbacks like apply_change, apply_truncate, or as is proposed by patch update_progress again because it is similar to existing callbacks like commit_prepared. If you and others don't like any of those then we can go for 'update_progress_txn' as well. Anybody else has an opinion on this? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
