From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
cc: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: "(process)" is missing for some terms about process in glossary
In-reply-to: <51b76596-ab4f-c9f0-1005-60ce1bb14b6b@oss.nttdata.com>
References: <51b76596-ab4f-c9f0-1005-60ce1bb14b6b@oss.nttdata.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
	message dated "Fri, 07 Jan 2022 23:37:53 +0900"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1348386.1641573716.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2022 11:41:56 -0500
Message-ID: <1348387.1641573716@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1348387.1641573716%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> writes:
> In glossary, the title of each term about process seems to consist of th=
e process name and "(process)", e.g., Checkpointer (process). But I found =
that "(process)" is missing for the following three terms about process. A=
ttached is the patch to add "(process)" to them.

> - Auxiliary process
> - Startup process
> - WAL receiver

I think "Auxiliary process (process)" is redundant to the point
of being silly.  +1 for addiing it to "WAL receiver", though,
since that's not obviously a process.

			regards, tom lane