Re: bgwriter reference to HOT standby

From: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: bgwriter reference to HOT standby
Date: 2013-01-24 07:25:33
Message-ID: CABOikdNwaQPg=WX-w=yBTQP-83qk___+MRpmb58YiWXRsJaF+Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The docs on bgworker twice refer to "HOT standby". I don't think that in
> either case, the "hot" needs emphasis, and if it does making it look like an
> acronym (one already used for something else) is probably not the way to do
> it.

I think it should it be "Hot Standby" for consistency. +1 for changing
it from HOT to hot/Hot anyway

Thanks,
Pavan

--
Pavan Deolasee
http://www.linkedin.com/in/pavandeolasee

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2013-01-24 07:27:09 Re: My first patch! (to \df output)
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2013-01-24 07:06:01 bgwriter reference to HOT standby