Re: The word "virgin" used incorrectly and probably better off replaced

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, brian(dot)williams(at)mayalane(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: The word "virgin" used incorrectly and probably better off replaced
Date: 2019-11-08 08:52:48
Message-ID: A741B80F-2C56-4F3B-9E9B-37A09BEA9252@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

> On 7 Nov 2019, at 22:50, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 2019-Nov-07, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 07:55:22PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>>> On 7 Nov 2019, at 16:03, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>>> 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.
>
> But you would have to explain that a database created as a copy of
> template1 may somehow not be pristine. Maybe we should just use a
> phrase that describes what we mean, something like "a database that
> doesn't contain objects other than default system ones."

Agreed. I like your suggestion, or the inverse of it: "a database without any
user defined objects".

cheers ./daniel

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-11-08 13:10:14 Re: The word "virgin" used incorrectly and probably better off replaced
Previous Message PG Doc comments form 2019-11-08 06:43:43 tables in the DB is not available after pg_restore.