On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 12:07:21PM -0600, Dave Cramer wrote: > On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 at 11:59, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: >> I don't really like the name pattern you've chosen though; I think we >> need to have a common prefix in the defines. Maybe prepending PQMSG_ to >> each name would be enough. And maybe turn the _RESPONSE and _REQUEST >> suffixes you added into prefixes as well, so instead of PARSE_REQUEST >> you could make it PQMSG_REQ_PARSE, PQMSG_RESP_BIND_COMPLETE and so >> on. >> > That becomes trivial to do now that the names are defined. I presumed > someone would object to the names. > I'm fine with the names you propose, but I suggest we wait to see if anyone > objects.
I'm okay with the proposed names as well. > + * src/include/protocol.h Could we put these definitions in an existing header such as src/include/libpq/pqcomm.h? I see that's where the authentication request codes live today. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
