Re: fixes for a few GUC descriptions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 9:18 AM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Some new parameters added since commit 977d865c36 do not follow the GUC
> > description rules established by that commit.  I've attached a patch to fix
> > them.
>
> Patch looks good to me.

+1 except for one thing.

-  long_desc => '-1 disables the timeout and waits for the receiver to
catch up; 0 does not wait for the receiver to catch up.',
+  long_desc => '-1 disables the timeout. 0 means do not wait for the
receiver to catch up.',

The previous wording was intentionally added based on Daniel's comment [1].

Regards,

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/B5EB4E43-290E-4509-AFF5-06453E4966CE%40yesql.se
> "A value of <literal>-1</literal> (the default) disables the timeout
> mechanism"
>
> To me as a non-native speaker reading that a timeout is disabled can be
> interpreted as if there is no waiting done, just like the in the case of 0.

--
Fujii Masao