| From: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Correction in doc of failover ready steps |
| Date: | 2024-07-24 02:56:01 |
| Message-ID: | CAJpy0uAeROTfqdoGWvZ9zqH4kRX5LECEGP1q-cTdmV9sYmWG6w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 5:10 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> One minor comment:
> - if the table copy is finished (See <xref
> linkend="catalog-pg-subscription-rel"/>).
> + On the subscriber node, use the following SQL to identify which main
> + slots should be synced to the standby that we plan to promote. This query
>
> Shall we refer to these slots as replication slots instead of main
> slots in the above sentence? We don't have a main slot terminology at
> other places, so it would be better not to introduce a new one. I know
> that it was introduced in the original commit but it seems better to
> change if we agree.
Yes, it makes sense. Please find the patch with this change.
thanks
SHveta
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v3-0001-Correction-in-doc-of-failover-ready-steps.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) | 2024-07-24 03:32:12 | RE: Correction in doc of failover ready steps |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2024-07-23 11:40:25 | Re: Correction in doc of failover ready steps |