Hi, On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 03:38:59PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 9:13 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 11:35 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Also, adding wait sounds > > > more like a boolean. So, I don't see the proposed names any better > > > than the current one. > > > > > > > Anyway, the point is that the current GUC name 'standby_slot_names' is > > not ideal IMO because it doesn't have enough meaning by itself -- e.g. > > you have to read the accompanying comment or documentation to have any > > idea of its purpose. > > > > Yeah, one has to read the description but that is true for other > parameters like "temp_tablespaces". I don't have any better ideas but > open to suggestions.
What about "non_lagging_standby_slots"? Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
