Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([98.129.198.125]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1T1K6z-0007BW-BP for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 16:36:57 +0000 Received: from momjian.us ([72.94.173.45]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1T1K6v-0003Un-GV for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 16:36:56 +0000 Received: from bruce by momjian.us with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1T1K6r-00019b-B5; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 12:36:49 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 12:36:49 -0400 From: Bruce Momjian To: Robert Haas Cc: Jaime Casanova , Gavin Flower , pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Message-ID: <20120814163649.GA11913@momjian.us> References: <4E325671.8070602@archidevsys.co.nz> <20120811023643.GD3576@momjian.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120811023643.GD3576@momjian.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201208/14 X-Sequence-Number: 7407 --ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 10:36:43PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 01:59:43PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Gavin Flower > > > wrote: > > >> /postgres-9.1/share/doc/html/manage-ag-overview.html > > >> In the folowing partagrasoh 'recommendable' should be 'recommended'. > > >> > > >> [...] > > >> Databases are physically separated and access > > >> control is managed at the connection level. If one PostgreSQL server > > >> instance is to house projects or users that should be separate and for the > > >> most part unaware of each other, it is therefore recommendable to put them > > >> into separate databases. If the projects or users are interrelated and > > >> should be able to use each other's resources, they should be put in the same > > >> database but possibly into separate schemas. > > >> [...] > > >> > > > > > > maybe it's because i'm not a natural english speaker but this sounds > > > like we are recommended to put the users in another database. probably > > > it is refering to the user's resources... maybe we can make it more > > > explicit? > > > > The only thing that seems weird about it to me is that recommendable > > is a word that is almost never used by native English speakers. Or at > > least not the native English speakers I know. > > I did some research on this and this was the best description I could > find was: > > http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=693689 > > If you want to suggest others use it, it is recommended. If you want to > suggest others tell their friends and aquaintances to use it, it would > be recommendable. > > I think all doc mentions of 'recommendable' should be changed to > 'recommended'. Done with the attached patch, backpatched to 9.2. -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + --ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="recommend.diff" diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/charset.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/charset.sgml new file mode 100644 index 6b0793e..67e39b2 *** a/doc/src/sgml/charset.sgml --- b/doc/src/sgml/charset.sgml *************** SELECT * FROM test1 ORDER BY a || b COLL *** 563,569 **** pg_collation are ignored. Thus, a stripped collation name such as de_DE can be considered unique within a given database even though it would not be unique globally. ! Use of the stripped collation names is recommendable, since it will make one less thing you need to change if you decide to change to another database encoding. Note however that the default, C, and POSIX collations can be used --- 563,569 ---- pg_collation are ignored. Thus, a stripped collation name such as de_DE can be considered unique within a given database even though it would not be unique globally. ! Use of the stripped collation names is recommended, since it will make one less thing you need to change if you decide to change to another database encoding. Note however that the default, C, and POSIX collations can be used diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/installation.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/installation.sgml new file mode 100644 index 056e802..c02ed87 *** a/doc/src/sgml/installation.sgml --- b/doc/src/sgml/installation.sgml *************** su - postgres *** 92,98 **** You need an ISO/ANSI C compiler (at least C89-compliant). Recent ! versions of GCC are recommendable, but PostgreSQL is known to build using a wide variety of compilers from different vendors. --- 92,98 ---- You need an ISO/ANSI C compiler (at least C89-compliant). Recent ! versions of GCC are recommended, but PostgreSQL is known to build using a wide variety of compilers from different vendors. diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/manage-ag.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/manage-ag.sgml new file mode 100644 index 2b11293..e5a5947 *** a/doc/src/sgml/manage-ag.sgml --- b/doc/src/sgml/manage-ag.sgml *************** *** 44,50 **** connection level. If one PostgreSQL server instance is to house projects or users that should be separate and for the most part unaware of each other, it is therefore ! recommendable to put them into separate databases. If the projects or users are interrelated and should be able to use each other's resources, they should be put in the same database but possibly into separate schemas. Schemas are a purely logical structure and who can --- 44,50 ---- connection level. If one PostgreSQL server instance is to house projects or users that should be separate and for the most part unaware of each other, it is therefore ! recommended to put them into separate databases. If the projects or users are interrelated and should be able to use each other's resources, they should be put in the same database but possibly into separate schemas. Schemas are a purely logical structure and who can diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/passwordcheck.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/passwordcheck.sgml new file mode 100644 index 0050e65..415749d *** a/doc/src/sgml/passwordcheck.sgml --- b/doc/src/sgml/passwordcheck.sgml *************** *** 47,53 **** This limits the usefulness of the passwordcheck module, because in that case it can only try to guess the password. For this reason, passwordcheck is not ! recommendable if your security requirements are high. It is more secure to use an external authentication method such as Kerberos (see ) than to rely on passwords within the database. --- 47,53 ---- This limits the usefulness of the passwordcheck module, because in that case it can only try to guess the password. For this reason, passwordcheck is not ! recommended if your security requirements are high. It is more secure to use an external authentication method such as Kerberos (see ) than to rely on passwords within the database. diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml new file mode 100644 index 2d9531f..e34dfc0 *** a/doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml --- b/doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml *************** SELECT product_id, p.name, (sum(s.units) *** 1099,1105 **** Currently, window functions always require presorted data, and so the query output will be ordered according to one or another of the window functions' PARTITION BY/ORDER BY clauses. ! It is not recommendable to rely on this, however. Use an explicit top-level ORDER BY clause if you want to be sure the results are sorted in a particular way. --- 1099,1105 ---- Currently, window functions always require presorted data, and so the query output will be ordered according to one or another of the window functions' PARTITION BY/ORDER BY clauses. ! It is not recommended to rely on this, however. Use an explicit top-level ORDER BY clause if you want to be sure the results are sorted in a particular way. --ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd--