Re: Skip collecting decoded changes of already-aborted transactions

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 3:11 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It seems we agreed on RBTXN_IS_PREPARED and rbtxn_is_prepared().
> Adding 'IS' seems to clarify the transaction having this flag *is* a
> prepared transaction. Both other two constants RBTXN_SENT_PREAPRE and
> RBTXN_SKIPPED_PREPARE seem not bad to me.
>

Agreed.

> I find that the proposed
> names don't increase the consistency much. Thoughts?
>

I also think so.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.