|From:||ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker )|
|To:||Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>|
|Cc:||PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: Remove one last occurrence of "replication slave" in comments|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
> A Twitter thread today regarding the use of master/slave  made me curious
> and so I had a look. It seems that commit a1ef920e27ba6ab3602aaf6d6751d8628
> replaced most instances but missed at least one which is fixed in the attached.
> cheers ./daniel
There were some more master/slave references in the plpgsql foreign key
tests, which the attached chages to base/leaf instead.
I didn't touch the last mention of "slave", in the pltcl code, because
it's calling the Tcl_CreateSlave() API function.
"The surreality of the universe tends towards a maximum" -- Skud's Law
"Never formulate a law or axiom that you're not prepared to live with
the consequences of." -- Skud's Meta-Law
|Next Message||Pavel Stehule||2019-06-19 17:46:46||Re: idea: log_statement_sample_rate - bottom limit for sampling|
|Previous Message||Thom Brown||2019-06-19 16:06:51||Re: SQL/JSON path issues/questions|