| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add 'worker_type' to pg_stat_subscription |
| Date: | 2023-09-16 00:13:18 |
| Message-ID: | ZQTzHlxZN1MqpoT1@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 09:35:38AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Concretely, like this.
There are two references to "synchronization worker" in tablesync.c
(exit routine and busy loop), and a bit more of "sync worker"..
Anyway, these don't matter much, but there are two errmsgs where the
term "tablesync worker" is used. Even if they are internal, these
could be made more consistent at least?
In config.sgml, max_sync_workers_per_subscription's description uses
"synchronization workers". In the second case, adding "table" makes
little sense, but could it for the two other sentences?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Erik Rijkers | 2023-09-16 03:59:26 | Re: JSON Path and GIN Questions |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2023-09-16 00:03:12 | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |