Re: Use consistent terminology for tablesync slots.

From: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Use consistent terminology for tablesync slots.
Date: 2021-03-31 01:09:43
Message-ID: CAHut+PshrNajqwUN87rQ9WRGK+TzVgYcC5FXhQRv2515ig=TDA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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.

------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

Attachment Content-Type Size
v2-0001-Use-consistent-terminology-for-tablesync-slots.patch application/octet-stream 1.4 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2021-03-31 01:11:37 Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-03-31 01:01:45 Re: Refactor SSL test framework to support multiple TLS libraries