Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 16:27:50 -0500
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, brian.williams@mayalane.com,
	pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: The word "virgin" used incorrectly and probably better off
 replaced
Message-ID: <20191107212750.GB487@momjian.us>
References: <20191107150320.GA8132@alvherre.pgsql>
 <3F23BAF9-F616-4B7A-9072-C59349F517E7@yesql.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3F23BAF9-F616-4B7A-9072-C59349F517E7@yesql.se>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov  7, 2019 at 07:55:22PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 7 Nov 2019, at 16:03, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> 
> > because we have not explained what a "virgin database" is.  
> 
> I think this is the key observation.
> 
> > We could say "empty", which seems better suited than both "virgin" and
> > "pristine" anyway.
> 
> empty is a lot better, but still isn't conveying the state of the database
> without there being room for interpretation.  (My grasp of the english language
> isn't enough to suggest a better alternative however).

I am thinking "pristine" would be a good word here.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +