On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 8:55 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 10:34 AM Amit Kapila > <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > So names like the below seem correct format: > > > > > > > > a) WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_APPLY_SEND_DATA > > > > b) WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_LEADER_SEND_DATA > > > > c) WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_LEADER_APPLY_SEND_DATA > > > > > > Personally I'm fine even without "LEADER" in the wait event name since > > > we don't have "who is waiting" in it. IIUC a row of pg_stat_activity > > > shows who, and the wait event name shows "what the process is > > > waiting". So I prefer (a). > > > > > > > This logic makes sense to me. So, let's go with (a). > > OK, here is patch that change the event name to > WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_APPLY_SEND_DATA. >
LGTM. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
