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)?
--
Michael