On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 12:04 PM Dave Cramer <davecramer@gmail.com> wrote: > Patch attached
+/* Replication Protocol sent by the primary */ + +#define PqMsg_XlogData 'w' +#define PqMsg_PrimaryKeepAlive 'k' +#define PqMsg_PrimaryStatusUpdate 's' + + +/* Replication Protocol sent by the standby */ + +#define PqMsg_StandbyStatus 'r' +#define PqMsg_HotStandbyFeedback 'h' +#define PqMsg_RequestPrimaryStatus 'p'
Since these are part of the replication subprotocol (i.e. tunneled, via CopyData) rather than the top-level wire protocol, do they deserve their own prefix? PqReplMsg_* maybe?
I'm going to wait to see if there are any other opinions. Last time I did this there were quite a few opinions before finally settling on the naming
+/* These are the codes sent by the frontend and backend. */ + +#define PqMsg_PasswordMessage 'p' + +/* These are the codes sent by the frontend and backend. */
Is this change intended?
It was as it lines up with the others at least in my editor.
