Re: More protocol.h replacements this time into walsender.c

On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 at 10:38, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 05:39:14PM -0400, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Jul 2025 at 17:05, Jacob Champion <
> > jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> >> 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
>
> +1 to a new prefix. I don't have any strong opinions on the exact choice,
> though. PqReplMsg, ReplMsg, PqMsg_Repl, etc. seem like some obvious
> options.
>
> I chose PqReplMsg patch attached

Dave