Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9EF9B5DC15 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 02:00:41 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 42757-03 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 05:00:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com (mail-iy0-f174.google.com [209.85.210.174]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CA8EB5DC0A for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 02:00:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: by iyb12 with SMTP id 12so7662306iyb.19 for ; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 22:00:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.167.66 with SMTP id r2mr118796icy.277.1312261234138; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 22:00:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.228.199 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 21:53:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E325671.8070602@archidevsys.co.nz> References: <4E325671.8070602@archidevsys.co.nz> From: Jaime Casanova Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 23:53:25 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: nwYJ5WGvCcnOZJlFRg6n7bmiRLU Message-ID: Subject: Re: postgres-9.1beta3 typo: recommendable --> recommended To: Gavin Flower Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201108/1 X-Sequence-Number: 6891 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 th= e > most part unaware of each other, it is therefore recommendable to put the= m > 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 s= ame > 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? --=20 Jaime Casanova=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 www.2ndQuadrant.com Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte 24x7 y capacitaci=F3n