| From: | Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Pg Docs <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Use of the word master |
| Date: | 2021-08-06 12:40:40 |
| Message-ID: | CADK3HHJgrJ=vRK_P_6zXQtRKgm3ek0Rnm8og7MTUgcKXup7fyg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 at 19:19, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> On 8/5/21 2:26 PM, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > PostgreSQL: Documentation: 13: 30.1. Publication
> > <
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/logical-replication-publication.html
> >
> >
> >
> > "A /publication/ can be defined on any physical replication master."
> >
> > I would propose "any physical replication primary"
>
> It could be any instance that's writable though. Perhaps:
>
> "A publication can be defined on any database that can accept writes."
>
> or
>
> "A publication can be defined on any database that is not in recovery."
>
> That said, +1 for the wording change.
>
Ya, the word primary is misleading here. I prefer
"A publication can be defined on any database that can accept writes."
as
"A publication can be defined on any database that is not in recovery."
introduces the concept of recovery which does not in my opinion add any
clarity.
Dave
>
> Jonathan
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2021-08-09 02:44:13 | Re: Update maintenance_work_mem/autovacuum_work_mem to reflect the 1GB limitation with VACUUM |
| Previous Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2021-08-05 23:19:47 | Re: Use of the word master |