Inconsistent terminology for -j/--jobs option in documentation

From: Tatsuro Yamada <yamatattsu(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Inconsistent terminology for -j/--jobs option in documentation
Date: 2026-01-10 02:48:21
Message-ID: CAOKkKFvHqA6Tny0RKkezWVfVV91nPJyj4OGtMi3C1RznDVXqrg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

While reading the pg_dump and pg_restore documentation, I noticed
that the terminology for the -j/--jobs option is inconsistent.

## pg_dump [1]
-j njobs
--jobs=njobs

## pg_restore [2]
-j number-of-jobs
--jobs=number-of-jobs

For the sake of consistency, I think it would be better to revise the
terminology as follows:

s/number-of-jobs/njobs/

To double-check, I also looked at the documentation for vacuumdb,
reindexdb, and pg_upgrade, and all of them use "njobs".

Please find the attached patch.

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/app-pgdump.html
[2] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/app-pgrestore.html

Regards,
Tatsuro Yamada

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Revised-terminology-for-consistency.patch application/octet-stream 1.6 KB

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuro Yamada 2026-01-10 03:14:33 Re: [PATCH] psql: add \dcs to list all constraints
Previous Message Japin Li 2026-01-10 02:19:57 Re: GIN pageinspect support for entry tree and posting tree