On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 7:36 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 10:04:12AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I agree with Robert's complaint that Parallel is far too generic
> > a term here. Also, the fact that this data is currently in struct
> > Port seems like an artifact.
> >
> > Don't we have a term for the set of processes comprising a leader
> > plus parallel workers? If we called that set FooGroup, then
> > something like FooGroupSharedInfo would be on-point.
>
> As far as I know, proc.h includes the term "group members", which
> includes the leader and its workers (see CLOG and lock part)?
lmgr/README also refers to "gangs of related processes" and "parallel
groups". So
- GroupSharedInfo
- ParallelGroupSharedInfo
- GangSharedInfo
- SharedLeaderInfo
?
--Jacob