>> > I agreed with adding <literal> tag to "failover" since it is done in the
>> > description on "slot_name" parameter.
>> >
>> > How about also rewrite it to "enable the failover option" rather than simply
>> > "enable the failover" to clarify that the parameter is refereed to.
>> >
>> > We could also use "enable the failover parameter". I think both make sense, but
>> > it seems that "failover option" is preferred in the slot_name description.
>>
>> But a few lines above we have:
>>
>> <para>
>> This clause specifies optional parameters for a subscription.
>> </para>
>>
>> <para>
>> The following parameters control what happens during subscription creation:
>>
>> So it seems "paramter" is more consistent than "option" here.
>
> For consistency, using "parameter" seems better.
>
> If we consider this, should we rewrite other places using "option" to use "parameter"?
> For example, I can find uses of "option" in the "connect", "slot_name", and "binary"
> descriptions in the CREATE SUBSCRIPTION document.
Not sure. In some places I think "option" is an abbreviation of
"optional parameter". So using "option" there does not seem to be
inconsistent or incorrect. See following example in create
subscription manual:
This clause specifies optional parameters for a subscription.
:
:
connect (boolean)
:
:
Since no connection is made when this option is false, no tables are subscribed.
> Also, the "public" parameter in CREATE PUBLICATION doc,
You mean "publish"?
> "vacuum_index_cleanup" and
> "vacuum_truncate" storage parameters in CREATE TABLE doc might be also targets to be
> rewritten. I am not sure if this covers all, though.
I would like to hear opinions from native English speakers.
Best reagards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS K.K.
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
