On Tue, Dec 9, 2025 at 11:50 AM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Dec 9, 2025, at 14:12, Amit Kapila <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2025 at 11:23 AM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Yeah, I just searched and see similar messages: > >> > >> ``` > >> logical replication parallel apply worker for subscription \"%s\" will > >> stop because the subscription owner's superuser privileges have been > >> revoked > >> > >> logical replication worker for subscription \"%s\" will restart because > >> the subscription owner's superuser privileges have been revoked > >> ``` > >> > >> I think the new phrase is better. Maybe “is triggered” could be “has been > >> triggered”? > >> > > > > My AI tool says: > > > > Both options are grammatically correct, but the nuance differs: > > "will stop because promotion is triggered" > > This uses the present tense ("is triggered"), which suggests the > > promotion event is happening right now, concurrently with the stopping > > action. > > "will stop because promotion has been triggered" > > This uses the present perfect tense ("has been triggered"), which > > implies the promotion event already occurred and is the reason for the > > upcoming stop. > > > > In this case, because ShutDownSlotSync() will wait for the slotsync > > worker to exit, so the first one ("will stop because promotion is > > triggered") fits better. > > > > Make sense. Then Zhijie’s v2 looks good to me. >
BTW, by mistake, I ended up pushing 0001 which I think in itself is not a bad idea. However, we can improve it at least in HEAD as part of patch[1] where we are making changes in the same part of code. Do you think that is okay? [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFPTHDYHjqq53f1Cbata2MrV2nRBDe6XgxXfqv4tw4rcT2-Y8Q%40mail.gmail.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
