| From: | David Wilson <david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | clist(at)uah(dot)es |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: superlative missuse |
| Date: | 2009-05-13 00:12:41 |
| Message-ID: | e7f9235d0905121712n5ea3bef3i8dc2a359b194075c@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Angel Alvarez <clist(at)uah(dot)es> wrote:
> we suffer a 'more optimal' superlative missuse
>
> there is not so 'more optimal' thing but a simple 'better' thing.
>
> im not native english speaker but i think it still applies.
>
> Well this a superlative list so all of you deserve a better "optimal" use.
As a native english speaker:
You are technically correct. However, "more optimal" has a
well-understood meaning as "closer to optimal", and as such is
appropriate and generally acceptable despite being technically
incorrect.
This is a postgres mailing list, not an english grammar mailing list...
--
- David T. Wilson
david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Aidan Van Dyk | 2009-05-13 00:34:48 | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-05-12 23:54:18 | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. |