On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Brendan Jurd <dire...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 at 06:03 Gurjeet Singh <gurj...@singh.im> wrote:
>
>
>> s/proportion/fraction/
>>
>
> I think of these as synonymous -- do you have any particular reason to
> prefer "fraction"? I don't feel strongly about it either way, so I'm quite
> happy to go with fraction if folks find that more expressive.
>
It just feels better to me in this context.
If the number of times used in Postgres code is any measure, 'fraction'
wins hands down: "proportion" : 33, "fraction": 620.
I don't feel strongly about it, either. I can leave it up to the committer
to decide.
>
>
>>
>> + * The caller must hold (at least) shared AysncQueueLock.
>>
>> A possibly better wording: The caller must hold AysncQueueLock in (at
>> least) shared mode.
>>
>
> Yes, that is more accurate.
>
OK.
>
>
>>
>> Unnecessary whitespace changes in pg_proc.h for existing functions.
>>
>>
> I did group the asynchronous notification functions together, which seemed
> reasonable as there are now three of them, and changed the tabbing between
> the function name and namespace ID to match, as is done elsewhere in
> pg_proc.h. I think those changes improve readability, but again I don't
> feel strongly about it.
>
Fair enough.
>
> +DESCR("get the current usage of the asynchronous notification queue");
>>
>> A possibly better wording: get the fraction of the asynchronous
>> notification queue currently in use
>>
>
> I have no objections to your wording.
>
>
OK. Please send a new patch with the changes you agree to, and I can mark
it ready for committer.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
