On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 11:45:40PM +0000, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> +1 to something like "wal replay" or "wal apply." My view is that
> terms like "startup" and "recovery" indicate the goal of the process
> while "replay" and "apply" just explain what it does. This would be
> in line with the other processes (e.g., the WAL receiver receives WAL,
> the checkpointer checkpoints, and the archiver archives). I don't
> have any strong opinion about it being two words, but maybe I am just
> conditioned from seeing walreceiver, walsender, and walwriter so
> often.
If we want to play the card of consistency with the existing names,
that would be "walreplayer", then. Jokes apart, "WAL replay" sounds
fine to me :)
I would be tempted to do more than that, though, bite the bullet and
go as far as renaming walsender to "WAL sender", "walreceiver" to "WAL
receiver", and "walwriter" to "WAL writer", even if that means
potentially breaking scripts monitoring ps outputs.
--
Michael