IIUC some future feature syncing of sequences is likely to share a lot of the tablesync worker code (maybe it is only differentiated by the relid being for a RELKIND_SEQUENCE?).
The original intent of this stats worker-type patch was to be able to easily know the type of the process without having to dig through other attributes (like relid etc.) to infer it. If you feel differentiating kinds of syncing processes won't be of interest to users then just generically calling it "synchronization" is fine by me. OTOH, if users might care what 'kind' of syncing it is, perhaps leaving the stats attribute as "table synchronization" (and some future patch would add "sequence synchronization") is better. TBH, I am not sure which option is best, so I am happy to go with the consensus. ------ Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia
