Re: superlative missuse

From: Tom Lane
Subject: Re: superlative missuse
Date: ,
Msg-id: 2139.1242234532@sss.pgh.pa.us
(view: Whole thread, Raw)
In response to: Re: superlative missuse  (Chris Browne)
Responses: Re: superlative missuse  (Angel Alvarez)
List: pgsql-performance

Tree view

superlative missuse  (Angel Alvarez, )
 Re: superlative missuse  (David Wilson, )
  Re: superlative missuse  (Craig James, )
 Re: superlative missuse  (Chris Browne, )
  Re: superlative missuse  (Tom Lane, )
   Re: superlative missuse  (Angel Alvarez, )
 Re: superlative missuse  (David Wilson, )

Chris Browne <> writes:
>  (Angel Alvarez) writes:
>> there is  not so 'more optimal' thing but a simple 'better' thing.

> If I wanted to be pedantic about it, I'd say that the word "nearly" is
> missing.

> That is, it would be "strictly correct" if one instead said "more
> nearly optimal."

This sort of construction is longstanding practice in English anyway.
The most famous example I can think of offhand is in the US
Constitution: "... in order to form a more perfect union ..."

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-performance by date:

From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: Any better plan for this query?..
From: Arjen van der Meijden
Date:
Subject: Re: AMD Shanghai versus Intel Nehalem