Re: Use consistent terminology for tablesync slots.

On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 6:39 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 8:14 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 2:21 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The logical replication tablesync worker creates tablesync slots.
> > >
> > > Previously some PG docs pages were referring to these as "tablesync
> > > slots", but other pages called them as "table synchronization slots".
> > >
> > > PSA a trivial patch which (for consistency) now calls them all the
> > > same - "tablesync slots"
> > >
> >
> > +1 for the consistency. But I think it better to use "table
> > synchronization slots" in the user-facing docs as that makes it easier
> > for users to understand.
> >
>
> PSA patch version 2 updated to use "table synchronization slots" as suggested.
>

Thanks, Pushed!

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.