| From: | Jürgen Purtz <juergen(at)purtz(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, Roger Harkavy <rogerharkavy(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Subject: | Re: Add A Glossary |
| Date: | 2020-03-29 09:29:50 |
| Message-ID: | ff6028d0-ff04-6d11-c41b-2bddb41777d0@purtz.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On 27.03.20 21:12, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 11:32:25PM +0100, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
>>>> + <glossterm>Archiver</glossterm>
>>> Can you change that to archiver process ?
>> I prefer the short term without the addition of 'process' - concerning
>> 'Archiver' as well as the other cases. But I'm not an native English
>> speaker.
> I didn't like it due to lack of context.
>
> What about "wal archiver" ?
>
> It occured to me when I read this.
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200327.163007.128069746774242774.horikyota.ntt%40gmail.com
>
"WAL archiver" is ok for me. In the current documentation we have 2
places with "WAL archiver" and 4 with "archiver"-only
(high-availability.sgml, monitoring.sgml).
"backend process" is an exception to the other terms because the
standalone term "backend" is sensibly used in diverse situations.
Kind regards, Jürgen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Corey Huinker | 2020-03-30 17:10:19 | Re: Add A Glossary |
| Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2020-03-28 15:33:01 | Re: char 0x00 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2020-03-29 09:56:15 | Re: color by default |
| Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2020-03-29 09:22:25 | Re: PATCH: add support for IN and @> in functional-dependency statistics use |