From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Peter Eisentraut > > 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. > > If we were to change those, that would break existing queries for > pg_stat_activity. That's new in PG10, so we could change it if we were > really eager. But it's probably not worth bothering. Then again, there > is pg_stat_wal_receiver. So it's all totally inconsistent. Not sure > where to go.
OK, I'm comfortable with as it is now. I made this ready for committer. You can fix the following and commit the patch. Thank you. > > * To achieve that, we pass "wal sender process" as username and > > username > > good catch Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
