On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 4:43 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 2:09 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > This patch has some problems with naming consistency. There's a
> > function called PushUndoRequest() which calls a function called
> > RegisterRollbackReq() to do the heart of the work. So, is it undo or
> > rollback? Are we pushing or registering? Is it a request or a req?
> >
>
> I think we can rename PushUndoRequest as RegisterUndoRequest and
> RegisterRollbackReq as RegisterUndoRequestGuts.
>
One thing I am not sure about the above suggestion is whether it is a
good idea to expose a function which ends with 'Guts'. I have checked
and found that there are a few similar precedents like
ExecuteTruncateGuts. Another idea could be to rename
RegisterRollbackReq as RegisterUndoRequestInternal. We have few
precedents for that as well.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
