Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"
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? Is a translator really not able to change 3 words in a week? Come again. -- Alvaro Herrera Developer, http://www.PostgreSQL.org/ Hi! I'm a .signature virus! cp me into your .signature file to help me spread! ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"
Alvaro Herrera wrote: 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? Is a translator really not able to change 3 words in a week? Come again. I think it is likely more about being able to reach the translators. The more common ones such as yourself are obvious but others may not be. Either way, I think that the change is valid and we need to do it. Joshua D. Drake ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"
Greg, All: > 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. Sounds like I'd better. Sending out this afternoon. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
