Re: Add publisher and subscriber to glossary documentation.

From: Andrew Atkinson <andyatkinson(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Add publisher and subscriber to glossary documentation.
Date: 2024-02-26 21:13:34
Message-ID: CAG6XLEnO6nhtki=kYU0U7ivpXd3hxqWAvWm0Lay88ONg_tT4xQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

If there's a movement towards "node" to refer to the database which has the
Subscription object, then perhaps the documentation for

31.2. Subscription, Chapter 31. Logical Replication
<https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/logical-replication-subscription.html>
should be updated as well, since it uses both the "database" and "node"
terms on the same page, and to me referring to the same thing (I could be
missing a subtlety).

See:

"The subscriber database..."

"A subscriber node may..."

Also, the word "database" in this sentence: "A subscription defines the
connection to another database" to me works, but I think using "node" there
could be more consistent if it’s referring to the server instance running
the database that holds the PUBLICATION. The connection string information
example later on the page shows "host" and "dbname" configured in the
CONNECTION value for the SUBSCRIPTION. This sentence seems like the use of
"database" in casual style to mean the "server instance" (or "node").

Also, the "The node where a subscription is defined". That one actually
feels to me like "The database where a subscription is defined", but then
that contradicts what I just said, and "node" is fine here but I think
"node" should be on the preceding sentence too.

Anyway, hopefully these examples show “node” and “database” are mixed and
perhaps others agree using one consistently might help the goals of the
docs.

Thanks!

On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 1:08 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Hi, the patch v4 LGTM.
>
> ======
> Kind Regards,
> Peter Smith.
> Fujitsu Australia
>
>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2024-02-26 21:55:10 Re: cleanup patches for dshash
Previous Message Melanie Plageman 2024-02-26 20:56:57 Re: Streaming read-ready sequential scan code