On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 12:23:34 +0900 (JST)
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> wrote:
> > parameter in this case (it is an "optional" parameter, though). However,
> > when we refer to the stored catalog value, we should call it an option or
> > a property and calling it parameter is not suitable.
>
> Not sure. The stored catalog value of a subscription can be changed
> ALTER SUBSCRIPTION. In the ALTER SUBSCRIPTION manual, the placeholders
> for these properties are "parameter". So I think we should use
> "parameter" in this case at least for the stored catalog values of
> subscriptions.
>
> > If so, I feel that "the failover" in the following statement means
> > the catalog value (or the failover feature itself), so we should not
> > rewrite this to "the failover parameter".
>
> My conclusion is we should rewrite it as "the failover parameter" for
> the reason above.
>
> >> To initiate replication, you must manually create the replication slot,
> >> enable the failover if required, enable the subscription, and refresh the
> >> subscription.
> >
> > Instead, should we use "failover option"?
>
> Yes. because "enable the failover" actually means an operation using
> ALTER SUBSCRIPTION IMO.
After reading the above, I think you would prefer "failover parameter" to
"failover option". However, after all, I'm fine with either any way.
If we use "the failover parameter", I would read "enable the failover parameter"
as "enable the failover parameter on executing ALTER SUBSCRIPTION command".
Otherwise in the "failover option" case, I would read "enable the failover option"
as "enable the subscription's failover option by executing ALTER SUBSCRIPTION command".
Regards,
Yugo Nagata
>
> > Or, if it would mean to the failover
> > feature rather than the parameter, is it not proper to add <literal> tag to this
> > "failover"?
>
> I don't think so.
>
> Best reagards,
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
> SRA OSS K.K.
> English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
> Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
--
Yugo NAGATA <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
