> On 7 Nov 2019, at 22:50, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.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@2ndquadrant.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
