> On Thu, Jul 16, 2026 at 01:04:38PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > > One concern I have is the name of the new function. > > pgstat_prep_pending() sounds a bit incomplete. Would a name such as > > pgstat_prep_pending_for_entry_ref() be clearer? > > Hmm. pgstat_prep_pending_for_entry_ref() would work here for the > name.
I think pgstat_prep_pending_from_entry_ref() is better that _for_. > Regarding the new function's comment, perhaps it could be phrased > similarly to that of pgstat_prep_pending_entry(), for example: > > Prepare the given entry to receive pending stats, if not already done. This simple comment is sufficient. fixed. > Finally, pgstat_get_entry_ref() does not return NULL when create is > true, but the new function itself does not enforce that assumption. It > might be worth adding an Assert(entry_ref != NULL), in addition to the > assertion on flush_pending_cb. Done. See the attached. -- Sami Imseih Amazon Web Services (AWS)
v2-0001-pgstat-add-pgstat_prep_pending_from_entry_ref-for.patch
Description: Binary data
