Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F672E0199;
	Thu,  6 Dec 2007 21:44:55 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 13055-04; Thu,  6 Dec 2007 21:44:44 -0400 (AST)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2190D2E019E;
	Thu,  6 Dec 2007 21:44:52 -0400 (AST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id lB71inqM005959;
	Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:44:49 -0500 (EST)
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: "distributed checkpoint" 
In-reply-to: <20071206220348.GM8451@alvh.no-ip.org> 
References: <20071206220348.GM8451@alvh.no-ip.org>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
	message dated "Thu, 06 Dec 2007 19:03:48 -0300"
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:44:49 -0500
Message-ID: <5958.1196991889@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200712/26
X-Sequence-Number: 4694

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> 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?

Yeah, "distributed" has a bunch of connotations that are wrong for this
purpose.

I spent a bit of time with a thesaurus but didn't come up with anything
that seemed le mot juste.  Best I could do was "spread checkpoint"
or "time-extended checkpoint".  Anybody have a better idea?

			regards, tom lane