Hi, On 2020-06-17 13:59:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 2:23 PM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > 0002: code: s/master/primary/ > > 0003: code: s/master/leader/ > > 0006: docs: s/master/root/ > > 0007: docs: s/master/supervisor/ > > I'd just like to make the pointer here that there's value in trying to > use different terminology for different things. I picked "leader" and > "worker" for parallel query and tried to use them consistently because > "master" and "slave" were being used widely to refer to physical > replication, and I thought it would be clearer to use something > different, so I did.
Just to be clear, that's exactly what I tried to do in the above patches. E.g. in 0003 I tried to follow the scheme you just outlined. There's a part of that patch that addresses pg_dump, but most of the rest is just parallelism related pieces that ended up using master, even though leader is the more widely used term. I assume you were just saying that the above use of different terms is actually helpful: > It's confusing if we use the same word for the server from which > others replicate, the table from which others inherit, the process > which initiates parallelism, and the first process that is launched > across the whole cluster, regardless of *which* word we use for those > things. So, I think there is every possibility that with careful > thought, we can actually make things clearer, in addition to avoiding > the use of terms that are no longer welcome. With which I wholeheartedly agree. Greetings, Andres Freund
