Re: fixes for a few GUC descriptions

> On Sep 11, 2026, at 08:54, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 9:18 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Some new parameters added since commit 977d865c36 do not follow the GUC
>>> description rules established by that commit. I've attached a patch to fix
>>> them.
>>
>> Patch looks good to me.
>
> +1 except for one thing.
>
> - long_desc => '-1 disables the timeout and waits for the receiver to
> catch up; 0 does not wait for the receiver to catch up.',
> + long_desc => '-1 disables the timeout. 0 means do not wait for the
> receiver to catch up.',
>
> The previous wording was intentionally added based on Daniel's comment [1].
>
> Regards,
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/B5EB4E43-290E-4509-AFF5-06453E4966CE%40yesql.se
>> "A value of <literal>-1</literal> (the default) disables the timeout
>> mechanism"
>>
>> To me as a non-native speaker reading that a timeout is disabled can be
>> interpreted as if there is no waiting done, just like the in the case of 0.
>
> --
> Fujii Masao
>

Yeah, here -1 is really more like “wait forever”, so just saying “disables the timeout” feels like it loses that distinction.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/