On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 04:30:07PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > Hello. > > At Mon, 23 Mar 2020 18:38:53 -0400, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote in > > Patch applied to master, thanks. > > The patch (8e8a0becb3) named archiver process as just "archiver". On > the other hand the discussion in the thread [1] was going to name the > process as "WAL/wal archiver". As all other processes related to WAL > are named as walreceiver, walsender, walwriter, wouldn't we name the > process like "wal archiver"? > > [1]: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200319195410.icib45bbgjwqb...@alap3.anarazel.de
Agreed. I ended up moving "wal" as a separate word, since it looks cleaner; patch attached. Tools that look for the backend type in pg_stat_activity would need to be adjusted; it would be an incompatibility. Maybe changing it would cause too much disruption. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/init/miscinit.c b/src/backend/utils/init/miscinit.c index a7b7b12249..2d625ee01e 100644 --- a/src/backend/utils/init/miscinit.c +++ b/src/backend/utils/init/miscinit.c @@ -221,16 +221,16 @@ GetBackendTypeDesc(BackendType backendType) backendDesc = "startup"; break; case B_WAL_RECEIVER: - backendDesc = "walreceiver"; + backendDesc = "wal receiver"; break; case B_WAL_SENDER: - backendDesc = "walsender"; + backendDesc = "wal sender"; break; case B_WAL_WRITER: - backendDesc = "walwriter"; + backendDesc = "wal writer"; break; case B_ARCHIVER: - backendDesc = "archiver"; + backendDesc = "wal archiver"; break; case B_STATS_COLLECTOR: backendDesc = "stats collector";
