Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CDEB2E0180 for ; Fri, 7 Dec 2007 03:52:17 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 03775-09 for ; Fri, 7 Dec 2007 03:52:11 -0400 (AST) Received: from nan-tic.vhost.interdominios.com (unknown [89.248.102.189]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A12C2E018D for ; Fri, 7 Dec 2007 03:52:10 -0400 (AST) Received: (qmail 13599 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2007 07:30:48 +0100 Received: from 111.pool85-52-225.static.orange.es (HELO albert.local) (85.52.225.111) by 89.248.102.190 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2007 07:30:42 +0100 From: Albert Cervera i Areny Organization: NaN To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: "distributed checkpoint" Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 08:51:59 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <20071206220348.GM8451@alvh.no-ip.org> In-Reply-To: <20071206220348.GM8451@alvh.no-ip.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200712070851.59287.albert@nan-tic.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200712/32 X-Sequence-Number: 4700 A Dijous 06 Desembre 2007, Alvaro Herrera va escriure: > 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. To me, non-native english speaker, time-distributed seems the clearer one. -- Albert Cervera i Areny http://www.NaN-tic.com