On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 12:55 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > a. How about describing w.r.t asynchronous connections > >> > instead of parallel connections? > >> > >> I don't think "asynchronous" is a good choice of word. > > > > Agreed. > > > >>Maybe "simultaneous"? > > > > Not sure. How about *concurrent* or *multiple*? > > multiple isn't right, but we could say concurrent.
I also find concurrent more appropriate. Dilip, could you please change it to concurrent in doc updates, variables, functions unless you see any objection for the same. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
