Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 09:12:33 -0500
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: doc:  remove verbiage about "receiving" data from rep.
 slots
Message-ID: <aRc40Suvuda74Hmx@momjian.us>
References: <E1vJuHW-006ZaM-2j@gemulon.postgresql.org>
 <gwo2ql4qlydwkmsurbz3gflnom5nq2p4wbbrz4xium7g75nnfp@4yohqyq5ijx5>
 <53n63x724ahx2nwx42bmivjlt67fpbyh44knx7jazodsqcs5av@umzjyyg3clpq>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53n63x724ahx2nwx42bmivjlt67fpbyh44knx7jazodsqcs5av@umzjyyg3clpq>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aRc40Suvuda74Hmx%40momjian.us>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 09:05:07AM -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2025-11-14 09:02:12 -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2025-11-14 13:56:06 +0000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > doc:  remove verbiage about "receiving" data from rep. slots
> > > 
> > > The slots are just LSN markers, not something to receive from.
> > 
> > I think this is wrong. Logical slots also preserve resources other than WAL.
> 
> I also think that the complaint about slots not being something to receive
> from is simply wrong for logical slots.

Uh, can you clarify since I can't find details on what they preserve. 
The reason I liked the new wording is that the slot is only a small part
of the receiving path.  Almost by definition, the slot is specified as
_part_ of the connection parameter --- it is not the connection
parameter.

Can you think of better wording that would be clearer than what we had?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.