Re: The word "virgin" used incorrectly and probably better off replaced

On 2019-Nov-08, Tom Lane wrote:

> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On 2019-Nov-08, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> So the patch becomes s/virgin/pristine/g plus add a parenthetical
> >> definition for the first use? Works for me.
>
> > Well, there are three uses of the word "virgin". The first is for
> > "virgin user", and the patch turns that into just "user".
>
> Uh, no, read the next lines. In both cases those are referring
> to "virgin user database" or "virgin database", and this patch
> is removing an important qualifier. It needs to be s/virgin/pristine/
> in all these places.

Doh, right.

One problem with doing it that way is that the proposed parenthical
comment partly duplicates the text immediately following it, so I'm no
longer so sure that adding it is good; I think that changing "local
additions" to "local additions and changes" might be sufficient, or
maybe that is too obscure for novices? For create_database.sgml it does
seem to make a little more sense, but I'm not 100% there either.

Maybe "changes" can become "database-local system changes"? i.e.,

By instructing CREATE DATABASE to copy template0 instead of
template1, you can create a pristine user database that contains
none of the site-local additions and database-local system changes
in template1.

... though, argh, "-local" appearing twice makes that look bad too :-(
(I'm not sure that it is clear what a "database-local system change" is.)

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services