Hi! On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 6:48 AM Xuneng Zhou <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 6:13 AM Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 7:52 AM Xuneng Zhou <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sat, Aug 29, 2026 at 5:40 AM Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:11 PM Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]> writes: > > > > > > While reviewing a patch for the WAIT FOR command I noticed that its > > > > > > command tag is "WAIT" rather than "WAIT FOR". I could not find this > > > > > > discussed in the main thread, although I have not read all of them, > > > > > > so > > > > > > I might miss something. I want to confirm it because a command tag > > > > > > is > > > > > > not something we can revisit later when we release v19.0. > > > > > > > > > > I think it's fine. The FOR is a noise word that's useful only to > > > > > make the command's grammar vaguely resemble English. For precedent, > > > > > consider INSERT, which must have INTO but that's not part of the > > > > > command tag. > > > > > > > > Good point. A difference between INSERT and WAIT is that the doc uses > > > > "WAIT FOR" as its command name instead of "WAIT" whereas it uses > > > > "INSERT" for INSERT statements: > > > > > > > > % git grep -e "<command>WAIT.*</command>" > > > > doc/src/sgml/ref/wait_for.sgml: <command>WAIT FOR</command> must be > > > > executed as a top-level command. > > > > doc/src/sgml/ref/wait_for.sgml: <command>WAIT FOR</command> waits > > > > until the specified > > > > doc/src/sgml/ref/wait_for.sgml: <command>WAIT FOR</command> compares > > > > only the numeric > > > > doc/src/sgml/ref/wait_for.sgml: <command>WAIT FOR</command> will > > > > return <literal>success</literal> > > > > doc/src/sgml/ref/wait_for.sgml: On a standby server, <command>WAIT > > > > FOR</command> sessions may be > > > > doc/src/sgml/ref/wait_for.sgml: doing. Applications using > > > > <command>WAIT FOR</command> on a standby > > > > doc/src/sgml/ref/wait_for.sgml: You can use <command>WAIT > > > > FOR</command> command to wait for > > > > doc/src/sgml/ref/wait_for.sgml: Then an application could run > > > > <command>WAIT FOR</command> > > > > doc/src/sgml/ref/wait_for.sgml: The same example uses <command>WAIT > > > > FOR</command> with > > > > doc/src/sgml/release-19.sgml: A new <link > > > > linkend="sql-wait-for"><command>WAIT FOR</command></link> > > > > doc/src/sgml/release-19.sgml:Add <link > > > > linkend="sql-wait-for"><command>WAIT FOR</command></link> command to > > > > allow standbys to wait for <link > > > > linkend="wal-internals"><acronym>LSN</acronym></link> values to be > > > > written, flushed, or replayed (Kartyshov Ivan, Alexander Korotkov, > > > > Xuneng Zhou) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Strictly the same rule would argue for > > > > > > "WAIT FOR LSN", but "WAIT FOR" is the name the manual gives the > > > > > > command, and it leaves room if other things become waitable in the > > > > > > future. > > > > > > > > > > If anything, I'd change the manual. "WAIT FOR" is neither short > > > > > nor a useful description of what's being waited for. Either "WAIT" > > > > > or "WAIT FOR LSN" would be more plausible as a page heading. > > > > > > > > Agreed. > > > > > > Thanks for raising this. The above reasoning makes sense to me. Here's > > > a patch for it. > > > > Thank you for the patch. I think we should do some additional renames. > > 1. Change <command>WAIT FOR</command> to <command>WAIT</command> in > > the page body. > > 2. The two error messages in commands/wait.c: WAIT FOR => WAIT > > 3. The reference id sql-waitfor => sql-wait > > 4. File name ref/wait_for.sgml => ref/wait.sgml, and the entity > > &waitFor => &wait > > Thanks for adding them. I did not notice that. Also changed the error > lines in the tap test.
Thank you for your feedback. I'm going to push it if no objections. ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov Supabase
