On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 12:23:34 +0900 (JST) Tatsuo Ishii <is...@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 <nag...@sraoss.co.jp>
