| From: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: template0 database comment |
| Date: | 2011-03-12 14:24:23 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimz+v74bWdwXuPE7MuwBf1X7o5B5qL_-iKu7S7J@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> I like that. Perhaps "unmodified template database'?
"why" tends to be more important than "what", particularly to a
confused DBA who's trying to figure out "why do they have all these
extra databases???"
Perhaps...
"backup template database - normally immutable, used if template1 is corrupted"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2011-03-12 14:24:53 | Re: template0 database comment |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2011-03-12 14:21:25 | Re: template0 database comment |