Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"

2007-12-12 Thread Josh Berkus
All,

Just FYI, it's going to be difficult to replace the name of the feature in 
the PR docs at this point; I already have 11 translations.  What's *wrong* 
with "Load Distributed Checkpoint", which is what we've been calling it 
for 6 months?

-- 
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"

2007-12-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Josh Berkus wrote:
> All,
> 
> Just FYI, it's going to be difficult to replace the name of the feature in 
> the PR docs at this point; I already have 11 translations.  What's *wrong* 
> with "Load Distributed Checkpoint", which is what we've been calling it 
> for 6 months?

There was nothing *wrong* with the old wording, but the new wording is
clearer?  Do you disagree it is clearer?  I don't think it makes sense
to keep less-clear wording just to match press release translations.

It is not like we are changing the wording 24 hours before final
release.  There will perhaps be other adjustments that might be needed
for the press release.  Also, the non-English press release isn't going
to match the English release notes word-for-word anyway (they aren't in
English) so is the new naming that big an issue?

I suggest you update the English press release and ask as many
translators who want to update theirs.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"

2007-12-12 Thread Greg Smith

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Josh Berkus wrote:

What's *wrong* with "Load Distributed Checkpoint", which is what we've 
been calling it for 6 months?


One issue was that "distributed" has some association with distributed 
computing, which isn't actually the case.  "Spread" is also more 
descriptive of what actually ended up being committed.  Those are fairly 
subtle wording issues that I wouldn't necessarily expect to survive 
translation.


The other problem was that the original description over-sold the feature 
a bit.  It said "prevent I/O spikes" when it actually just reduces them. 
Still possible to have a spike, it probably won't be as big though.  Your 
call on whether correcting that mischaracterization is worth bothering the 
translators over.


--
* Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster


Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"

2007-12-12 Thread Magnus Hagander
> Just FYI, it's going to be difficult to replace the name of the feature in 
> the PR docs at this point; I already have 11 translations.  What's *wrong* 
> with "Load Distributed Checkpoint", which is what we've been calling it 
> for 6 months?
> 

Are you saying the PR was 'string freezed' before rc1? And before the actual 
backend? I wonder how reasonable that really is...

That said we shouldn't change things around for no reason. IKn this case I 
think there was good motivation.

/Magnus


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings