public inbox for [email protected]help / color / mirror / Atom feed
postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 10+ messages / 8 participants [nested] [flat]
* postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended @ 2011-07-29 06:42 Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:03 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Tom Lane <[email protected]> 2011-08-02 04:53 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Jaime Casanova <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Gavin Flower @ 2011-07-29 06:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: pgsql-docs /postgres-9.1/share/doc/html/manage-ag-overview.html In the folowing partagrasoh 'recommendable' should be 'recommended'. [...] When connecting to the database server, a client must specify in its connection request the name of the database it wants to connect to. It is not possible to access more than one database per connection. However, an application is not restricted in the number of connections it opens to the same or other databases. 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. Schemas are a purely logical structure and who can access what is managed by the privilege system. More information about managing schemas is in Section 5.7. [...] ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> @ 2011-07-29 14:03 ` Tom Lane <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:13 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Dave Page <[email protected]> 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Tom Lane @ 2011-07-29 14:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gavin Flower <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs Gavin Flower <[email protected]> writes: > /postgres-9.1/share/doc/html/manage-ag-overview.html > In the folowing partagrasoh 'recommendable' should be 'recommended'. Seems perfectly ok as-is to me ... regards, tom lane ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:03 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Tom Lane <[email protected]> @ 2011-07-29 14:13 ` Dave Page <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:41 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Dave Page @ 2011-07-29 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Lane <[email protected]>; +Cc: Gavin Flower <[email protected]>; pgsql-docs On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: > Gavin Flower <[email protected]> writes: >> /postgres-9.1/share/doc/html/manage-ag-overview.html >> In the folowing partagrasoh 'recommendable' should be 'recommended'. > > Seems perfectly ok as-is to me ... Sounds hideous to me. I ran it past one of our tech writers (Susan Douglas), who rewrote the sentence as: If a single PostgreSQL server instance is to house projects or users that should be separate (for the most part unaware of each other), we recommend storing them in separate databases. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:03 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Tom Lane <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:13 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Dave Page <[email protected]> @ 2011-07-29 14:41 ` Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:45 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Dave Page <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:50 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Kevin Grittner <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2011-07-29 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>; Gavin Flower <[email protected]>; pgsql-docs Excerpts from Dave Page's message of vie jul 29 10:13:50 -0400 2011: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: > > Gavin Flower <[email protected]> writes: > >> /postgres-9.1/share/doc/html/manage-ag-overview.html > >> In the folowing partagrasoh 'recommendable' should be 'recommended'. > > > > Seems perfectly ok as-is to me ... > > Sounds hideous to me. I ran it past one of our tech writers (Susan > Douglas), who rewrote the sentence as: > > If a single PostgreSQL server instance is to house projects or users > that should be separate (for the most part unaware of each other), we > recommend storing them in separate databases. Except that we don't use the first person in docs, do we? -- Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:03 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Tom Lane <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:13 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Dave Page <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:41 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> @ 2011-07-29 14:45 ` Dave Page <[email protected]> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Dave Page @ 2011-07-29 14:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>; +Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>; Gavin Flower <[email protected]>; pgsql-docs On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote: > Excerpts from Dave Page's message of vie jul 29 10:13:50 -0400 2011: >> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Gavin Flower <[email protected]> writes: >> >> /postgres-9.1/share/doc/html/manage-ag-overview.html >> >> In the folowing partagrasoh 'recommendable' should be 'recommended'. >> > >> > Seems perfectly ok as-is to me ... >> >> Sounds hideous to me. I ran it past one of our tech writers (Susan >> Douglas), who rewrote the sentence as: >> >> If a single PostgreSQL server instance is to house projects or users >> that should be separate (for the most part unaware of each other), we >> recommend storing them in separate databases. > > Except that we don't use the first person in docs, do we? That's easily changed. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:03 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Tom Lane <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:13 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Dave Page <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:41 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> @ 2011-07-29 14:50 ` Kevin Grittner <[email protected]> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Kevin Grittner @ 2011-07-29 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Gavin Flower <[email protected]>; pgsql-docs; Tom Lane <[email protected]> Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote: > Except that we don't use the first person in docs, do we? find doc/src/sgml -name '*.sgml' | xargs cat | egrep -ci '\bwe\b' 786 -Kevin ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> @ 2011-08-02 04:53 ` Jaime Casanova <[email protected]> 2011-08-15 17:59 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Robert Haas <[email protected]> 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Jaime Casanova @ 2011-08-02 04:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gavin Flower <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 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? -- Jaime Casanova www.2ndQuadrant.com Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte 24x7 y capacitación ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 2011-08-02 04:53 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Jaime Casanova <[email protected]> @ 2011-08-15 17:59 ` Robert Haas <[email protected]> 2012-08-11 02:36 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Robert Haas @ 2011-08-15 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jaime Casanova <[email protected]>; +Cc: Gavin Flower <[email protected]>; pgsql-docs On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Jaime Casanova <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Gavin Flower > <[email protected]> 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. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 2011-08-02 04:53 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Jaime Casanova <[email protected]> 2011-08-15 17:59 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Robert Haas <[email protected]> @ 2012-08-11 02:36 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> 2012-08-14 16:36 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Bruce Momjian @ 2012-08-11 02:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Robert Haas <[email protected]>; +Cc: Jaime Casanova <[email protected]>; Gavin Flower <[email protected]>; pgsql-docs On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 01:59:43PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Jaime Casanova <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Gavin Flower > > <[email protected]> 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'. -- Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 2011-08-02 04:53 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Jaime Casanova <[email protected]> 2011-08-15 17:59 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Robert Haas <[email protected]> 2012-08-11 02:36 ` Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> @ 2012-08-14 16:36 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Bruce Momjian @ 2012-08-14 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Robert Haas <[email protected]>; +Cc: Jaime Casanova <[email protected]>; Gavin Flower <[email protected]>; pgsql-docs 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 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Gavin Flower > > > <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + Attachments: [text/x-diff] recommend.diff (5.5K, 2-recommend.diff) download | inline 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 **** <literal>pg_collation</literal> are ignored. Thus, a stripped collation name such as <literal>de_DE</literal> 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 <literal>default</>, <literal>C</>, and <literal>POSIX</> collations can be used --- 563,569 ---- <literal>pg_collation</literal> are ignored. Thus, a stripped collation name such as <literal>de_DE</literal> 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 <literal>default</>, <literal>C</>, and <literal>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 **** <para> You need an <acronym>ISO</>/<acronym>ANSI</> C compiler (at least C89-compliant). Recent ! versions of <productname>GCC</> are recommendable, but <productname>PostgreSQL</> is known to build using a wide variety of compilers from different vendors. </para> --- 92,98 ---- <para> You need an <acronym>ISO</>/<acronym>ANSI</> C compiler (at least C89-compliant). Recent ! versions of <productname>GCC</> are recommended, but <productname>PostgreSQL</> is known to build using a wide variety of compilers from different vendors. </para> 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 <productname>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 <productname>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 <filename>passwordcheck</filename> module, because in that case it can only try to guess the password. For this reason, <filename>passwordcheck</filename> is not ! recommendable if your security requirements are high. It is more secure to use an external authentication method such as Kerberos (see <xref linkend="client-authentication">) than to rely on passwords within the database. --- 47,53 ---- This limits the usefulness of the <filename>passwordcheck</filename> module, because in that case it can only try to guess the password. For this reason, <filename>passwordcheck</filename> is not ! recommended if your security requirements are high. It is more secure to use an external authentication method such as Kerberos (see <xref linkend="client-authentication">) 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' <literal>PARTITION BY</>/<literal>ORDER BY</> clauses. ! It is not recommendable to rely on this, however. Use an explicit top-level <literal>ORDER BY</> clause if you want to be sure the results are sorted in a particular way. </para> --- 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' <literal>PARTITION BY</>/<literal>ORDER BY</> clauses. ! It is not recommended to rely on this, however. Use an explicit top-level <literal>ORDER BY</> clause if you want to be sure the results are sorted in a particular way. </para> ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-08-14 16:36 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2011-07-29 06:42 postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended Gavin Flower <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:03 ` Tom Lane <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:13 ` Dave Page <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:41 ` Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:45 ` Dave Page <[email protected]> 2011-07-29 14:50 ` Kevin Grittner <[email protected]> 2011-08-02 04:53 ` Jaime Casanova <[email protected]> 2011-08-15 17:59 ` Robert Haas <[email protected]> 2012-08-11 02:36 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> 2012-08-14 16:36 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox