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

2007-12-13 Thread Alvaro Herrera
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

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

2007-12-13 Thread Joshua D. Drake
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 tra

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

2007-12-13 Thread Josh Berkus
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 wor