On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 19:37 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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?
I think 'update_progress_txn' might be better. Because I think this name seems to make it easier to know that this callback is used to update process when processing txn. So, I rename it to 'update_progress_txn'. I have addressed all the comments and here is the new version patch. Regards, Wang Wei
v4-0001-Fix-the-logical-replication-timeout-during-proces.patch
Description: v4-0001-Fix-the-logical-replication-timeout-during-proces.patch
