Re: Inconsistent terminology for -j/--jobs option in documentation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Inconsistent terminology for -j/--jobs option in documentation
Date
Msg-id aWHPmoA-4K7giZjv@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Inconsistent terminology for -j/--jobs option in documentation  (Tatsuro Yamada <yamatattsu@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Jan 10, 2026 at 11:48:21AM +0900, Tatsuro Yamada wrote:
> To double-check, I also looked at the documentation for vacuumdb,
> reindexdb, and pg_upgrade, and all of them use "njobs".

As far as I can see:
$ cd doc && git grep "number-of-jobs" | wc -l
3
$ cd doc && git grep "njobs" | wc -l
14

While it is minor, I agree that we could just make things consistent
across the board as you are suggesting, so LGTM.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuro Yamada
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] psql: add \dcs to list all constraints
Next
From: Jeremy Schneider
Date:
Subject: static tracepoints in pgstat_report_wait_start/end