On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 12:55 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > 1.
>> > + Number of parallel connections to perform the operation. This
>> > option will enable the vacuum
>> > + operation to run on parallel connections, at a time one table
>> > will
>> > be operated on one connection.
>> >
>> > a. How about describing w.r.t asynchronous connections
>> > instead of parallel connections?
>>
>> I don't think "asynchronous" is a good choice of word.
>
> Agreed.
>
>>Maybe "simultaneous"?
>
> Not sure. How about *concurrent* or *multiple*?
multiple isn't right, but we could say concurrent.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company