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
