Re: Typo in description of replay_lag attribute inpg_stat_replication view

05.12.2018 4:04, Michael Paquier wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 01:24:22AM +0300, Maksim Milyutin wrote:
>> Yeah, I think the notion *remote_flush level* is more appropriate especially
>> in the context of sync replication. Within this context maybe it makes sense
>> to replace the word *level* to *value* in description of *flush_lag*?
> I am not sure that this is an improvement.  Anyway, I have committed
> your original patch as that's clearly a mistake and back-patched down to
> v10.


Ok, thanks.

-- 
Regards,
Maksim Milyutin