doc: Fix missing word in user guide
@@ -572,7 +572,7 @@ In such a scenario it is necessary to avoid contention between multiple operator
There are two different leader election implementations to choose from, each with its own tradeoff.
-- [Leader-for-life][leader_for_life]: The leader pod only gives up leadership (via garbage collection) when it is deleted. This implementation precludes the possibility of 2 instances mistakenly running as leaders (split brain). However, this method can be subject to a delay in electing a new leader. For instance when the leader pod is on an unresponsive or partitioned node, the [`pod-eviction-timeout`][pod_eviction_timeout] dictates how it takes for the leader pod to be deleted from the node and step down (default 5m).
+- [Leader-for-life][leader_for_life]: The leader pod only gives up leadership (via garbage collection) when it is deleted. This implementation precludes the possibility of 2 instances mistakenly running as leaders (split brain). However, this method can be subject to a delay in electing a new leader. For instance when the leader pod is on an unresponsive or partitioned node, the [`pod-eviction-timeout`][pod_eviction_timeout] dictates how long it takes for the leader pod to be deleted from the node and step down (default 5m).
- [Leader-with-lease][leader_with_lease]: The leader pod periodically renews the leader lease and gives up leadership when it can't renew the lease. This implementation allows for a faster transition to a new leader when the existing leader is isolated, but there is a possibility of split brain in [certain situations][lease_split_brain].
By default the SDK enables the leader-for-life implementation. However you should consult the docs above for both approaches to consider the tradeoffs that make sense for your use case.
