Thread: Rename injection point names in test_aio
Hi all, (well, Andres) 93bc3d75d8e1 has introduced a couple of new injection points, but these don't follow the convention in-place where points are named more-or-less-like-that. Please find attached a patch to make all these more consistent. Thoughts or comments? -- Michael
Attachment
Dear Michael, > 93bc3d75d8e1 has introduced a couple of new injection points, but > these don't follow the convention in-place where points are named > more-or-less-like-that. Please find attached a patch to make all > these more consistent. I have no objections for the patch, but I feel there are no concrete naming rules (I confused while creating patches). Can we clarify that? E.g., first term should be a module or process, or something like that. Best regards, Hayato Kuroda FUJITSU LIMITED
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 08:13:44AM +0000, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote: > I have no objections for the patch, but I feel there are no concrete naming rules > (I confused while creating patches). There has been a sort of implied rule in the code to use lower characters, with terms separated by dashes. Perhaps we could make that more official with an extra sentence in the docs about that. > Can we clarify that? E.g., first term should be a module or process, > or something like that. Not sure that it would be a good thing to put context-specific restrictions here. Anyway, would you like to propose a patch for the documentation? -- Michael
Attachment
Dear Michael, > > I have no objections for the patch, but I feel there are no concrete naming rules > > (I confused while creating patches). > > There has been a sort of implied rule in the code to use lower > characters, with terms separated by dashes. Perhaps we could make > that more official with an extra sentence in the docs about that. Agreed. > > Can we clarify that? E.g., first term should be a module or process, > > or something like that. > > Not sure that it would be a good thing to put context-specific > restrictions here. My main concern is that in someday the name of injection points might be conflict, and it might be painful to consider after the number of points is increased. But it's OK to leave here now. > Anyway, would you like to propose a patch for the documentation? Sure, I did. Please see [1]. [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/OSCPR01MB14966E14C1378DEE51FB7B7C5F5B32%40OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com Best regards, Hayato Kuroda FUJITSU LIMITED