Re: 4th draft up -- get your comments in!

I like it.

Only one nitpick. In the features section, we twice say the feature is for 8.1. That seems implied to me. I recommend dropping the clause "for 8.1" in "the buffer manager for 8.1 has..." and "in version 8.1," in "in version 8.1, the query planner is ..."

Other than that, thumbs up from me.

-----Original Message-----
From: Josh Berkus [mailto:josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com]
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 6:19 PM
To: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: [pgsql-advocacy] 4th draft up -- get your comments in!

Folks,

There's a 4th draft up. I made the following changes:

-- I replaced the technical summary in the first paragraph with a "business
summary", explaining what the new features *mean* to Joe User. This was
on the advice of GreenPlum's public relations staff.

-- Moved a sentence from the 2nd P to the 1st P

-- Replaced Lance's quote.

Given that time is short, and we could tinker with this forever, I'm going
to close re-writes and declare it final on Saturday afternoon (PDT). So
get your edits in now!

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Lance,

> Only one nitpick. In the features section, we twice say the feature is for 8.1. That seems implied to me. I recommend dropping the clause "for 8.1" in "the buffer manager for 8.1 has..." and "in version 8.1," in "in version 8.1, the query planner is ..."
>

OK, I'll take a look. I'm a little more concerned about the fact that
I use the words "enhanced" and "improved" at least 6 times each, and
"refactored" twice. Bonus points for anyone who can find ways to
replace some of these!

Also, Lance, I thought I had an "about Pervasive" on file, but I don't
seem to. Can you get me the 4 line version? Thanks!

--Josh

Josh,

My pinch of salt about the usage of "enhanced" and "improved". You can also
used "better" and "superior". All those 4 words are synonyms.

IMHO, it is not too bad to use a certain word twice and I will let be like it
is.

Bernard

PS Hoping that my message will go through...I do not remember with which email
address I subscribed.

On Friday 07 October 2005 12:40, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Lance,
>
> > Only one nitpick. In the features section, we twice say the feature is
> > for 8.1. That seems implied to me. I recommend dropping the clause
> > "for 8.1" in "the buffer manager for 8.1 has..." and "in version 8.1," in
> > "in version 8.1, the query planner is ..."
>
> OK, I'll take a look. I'm a little more concerned about the fact that
> I use the words "enhanced" and "improved" at least 6 times each, and
> "refactored" twice. Bonus points for anyone who can find ways to
> replace some of these!
>
> Also, Lance, I thought I had an "about Pervasive" on file, but I don't
> seem to. Can you get me the 4 line version? Thanks!
>
> --Josh
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Bernard,

Unfortunately, "better" and "superior" in this context are not synonyms.
I'm using them in the context of "was improved". Believe me, I
consulted my Roget's and Thesaurus.com, and wasn't able to come up with
anything ...

--Josh