From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: language cleanups in code and docs |
Date: | 2020-07-08 21:19:41 |
Message-ID: | 07e68696-7b45-37cc-4e36-4f682c80cb09@pgmasters.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/8/20 5:17 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2020-Jul-08, David Steele wrote:
>
>> On 7/8/20 4:39 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
>> I think this phrasing in the original/updated version is pretty awkward:
>>
>> + A standby server that cannot be connected to until it is promoted to a
>> + primary server is called a ...
>
> Yeah.
>
>> How about:
>>
>> + A standby server that must be promoted to a primary server before
>> + accepting connections is called a ...
>
> How about just reducing it to "A standby server that doesn't accept
> connection is called a ..."? We don't really need to explain that if
> you do promote the standby it will start accept connections -- do we?
> It should be pretty obvious if you promote a standby, it will cease to
> be a standby in the first place. This verbiage seems excessive.
Works for me.
Regards,
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-07-08 21:26:48 | Re: Is this a bug in pg_current_logfile() on Windows? |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-07-08 21:17:56 | Re: language cleanups in code and docs |