| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | "distributed checkpoint" |
| Date: | 2007-12-06 22:03:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20071206220348.GM8451@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
Am I the only one who finds the phrase "distributed checkpointing" a bit
awkward? Would it be better if we used "time-distributed checkpointing"
instead?
The phrase is used in the release notes, but it's not used anywhere in
the main docs.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/DXLWNGRJD34J
"Hay quien adquiere la mala costumbre de ser infeliz" (M. A. Evans)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-12-07 01:44:49 | Re: "distributed checkpoint" |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-12-06 17:48:11 | Re: lastval() not included in table |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rainer Bauer | 2007-12-06 22:45:26 | Re: Problem with ControlFileData structure being ABI dependent |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-12-06 21:02:21 | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #3799: csvlog skips some logs |