From: Peter Eisentraut
> The process names shown in pg_stat_activity.backend_type as of PG10
and
> the process names used in the ps display are in some cases
gratuitously
> different, so here is a patch to make them more alike. Of course it
> could be debated in some cases which spelling was better.
(1)
In the following comment, it's better to change "wal sender process"
to "walsender" to follow the modified name.
- * postgres: wal sender process <user> <host> <activity>
+ * postgres: walsender <user> <host> <activity>
*
* To achieve that, we pass "wal sender process" as username and
username
* as dbname to init_ps_display(). XXX: should add a new variant
of
* init_ps_display() to avoid abusing the parameters like this.
*/
(2)
"WAL writer process" is used, not "walwriter", is used in postmaster.c
as follows. I guess this is for natural language. Is this intended?
I'm OK with either, though.
HandleChildCrash(pid, exitstatus,
_("WAL writer process"));
case WalWriterProcess:
ereport(LOG,
(errmsg("could not fork WAL writer process:
%m")));
Personally, I prefer "wal writer", "wal sender" and "wal receiver"
that separate words as other process names. But I don't mind leaving
them as they are now. I'd like to make this as ready for committer
when I get some reply.
Regards
MauMau
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
