Re: doc review for parallel vacuum

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:44:42AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 7:16 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > Also, this part still doesn't read well:
> >
> > -        * amvacuumcleanup to the DSM segment if it's the first time to get it?
> > -        * from them? because they? allocate it locally and it's possible that an
> > -        * index will be vacuumed by the different vacuum process at the next
> >
> > If you change "it" and "them" and "it" and say "*a* different", then it'll be
> > ok.
> >
> 
> I am not sure if I follow how exactly you want to change it but still
> let me know what you think about if we change it like: "Copy the index
> bulk-deletion result returned from ambulkdelete and amvacuumcleanup to
> the DSM segment if it's the first time because they allocate locally
> and it's possible that an index will be vacuumed by the different
> vacuum process at the next time."

I changed "the" to "a" and removed "at":

|Copy the index
|bulk-deletion result returned from ambulkdelete and amvacuumcleanup to
|the DSM segment if it's the first time [???] because they allocate locally
|and it's possible that an index will be vacuumed by a different
|vacuum process the next time."

Is it correct to say: "..if it's the first iteration" and "different process on
the next iteration" ?  Or "cycle" ?

-- 
Justin