Re: Autogenerate some wait events code and documentation
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Autogenerate some wait events code and documentation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Zg59l_8liovAWV3_@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Autogenerate some wait events code and documentation (Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Autogenerate some wait events code and documentation
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 09:28:36AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 03:50:21PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Is "Backpatch" the best choice we have, though? It speaks by itself >> but I was thinking about something different, like "Stable". Other >> ideas or objections are welcome. My naming sense is usually not that >> good, so there's that. > > I think "Stable" is more confusing because the section should also be empty until > the .0 is released. Okay. > That said, what about "ABI_compatibility"? (that would also match the comment > added in wait_event_names.txt). Attached v4 making use of the ABI_compatibility > proposal. I'm OK with that. If somebody comes up wiht a better name than that, this could always be changed again. > +# No "Backpatch" region here as code is generated automatically. > > What about "....region here as has its own C code" (that would be more consistent > with the comment in the "header" for the file). Done that way in v4. I'd add a "as -this section- has its own C code", for clarity. This just looked a bit strange here. > It looks like WAL_SENDER_WRITE_ZZZ was also added in it (I guess for testing > purpose, so I removed it in v4). That's a good brain fade. Thanks. -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: