[PATCH] confdb: warn if memcache_timeout > than entry_cache

[Pavel Reichl]

Hello, please see simple patch attached.

[Pavel Březina]

On 09/21/2015 04:33 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> Hello, please see simple patch attached.

Hi,
the patch looks good in general. However, I'd like to rephrase the warning.
>          "%s is lesser then %s, sysdb will not be updated for users.\n",

^lower

How about:

%s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory 
cache entry expires.

%s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory 
cache entry gets expired.

[Pavel Reichl]

On 09/22/2015 10:25 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> On 09/21/2015 04:33 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > Hello, please see simple patch attached.
>
> Hi,
> the patch looks good in general. However, I'd like to rephrase the warning.
> >          "%s is lesser then %s, sysdb will not be updated for users.\n",
>                      ^lower
>
> How about:
>
> %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory cache entry expires.
>
> %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory cache entry gets expired.
> _______________________________________________

Hello Pavel, thanks for comment. I updated the patch as you proposed.

I did quick research on usage of smaller/lower/lesser and all seem to for correct for our case, but I agree that lower might sound more common.

[Pavel Březina]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pavel Reichl" 
> To: [e-mail]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:31:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] confdb: warn if memcache_timeout > than entry_cache
>
> On 09/22/2015 10:25 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > On 09/21/2015 04:33 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > > Hello, please see simple patch attached.
> >
> > Hi,
> > the patch looks good in general. However, I'd like to rephrase the warning.
> > >          "%s is lesser then %s, sysdb will not be updated for
> > >
> > > users.\n",
> >                      ^lower
> >
> > How about:
> >
> > %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory cache
> > entry expires.
> >
> > %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory cache
> > entry gets expired.
> > _______________________________________________
>
> Hello Pavel, thanks for comment. I updated the patch as you proposed.
>
> I did quick research on usage of smaller/lower/lesser and all seem to for
> correct for our case, but I agree that lower might sound more common.

Hi,
I am not a native speaker but lesser sounds quite strange in this sentence. But I admit it may be my personal opinion and it can be grammatically correct (smaller sounds good to me as well).

On the other hand the first sentence I proposed and that you chose for your patch (entry expires) seems strange to me as well and I suggested it anyway. I would personally pick "entry gets expired/becomes expired/is expired" but I think "expires" is grammatically correct here and it is shorter. Any native speaker wants to chime in here? :-)

[Jakub Hrozek]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 04:50:02PM -0400, Pavel Brezina wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Pavel Reichl" 
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:31:45 PM
> > Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] confdb: warn if memcache_timeout > than entry_cache
> >
> > On 09/22/2015 10:25 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > > On 09/21/2015 04:33 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > > > Hello, please see simple patch attached.
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > the patch looks good in general. However, I'd like to rephrase the warning.
> > > >          "%s is lesser then %s, sysdb will not be updated for
> > > >
> > > > users.\n",
> > >                      ^lower
> > >
> > > How about:
> > >
> > > %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory cache
> > > entry expires.
> > >
> > > %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory cache
> > > entry gets expired.
> > > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Hello Pavel, thanks for comment. I updated the patch as you proposed.
> >
> > I did quick research on usage of smaller/lower/lesser and all seem to for
> > correct for our case, but I agree that lower might sound more common.
>
> Hi,
> I am not a native speaker but lesser sounds quite strange in this sentence. But I admit it may be my personal opinion and it can be grammatically correct (smaller sounds good to me as well).
>
> On the other hand the first sentence I proposed and that you chose for your patch (entry expires) seems strange to me as well and I suggested it anyway. I would personally pick "entry gets expired/becomes expired/is expired" but I think "expires" is grammatically correct here and it is shorter. Any native speaker wants to chime in here? :-)

Please ping either Dan or Stephen on IRC to settle this down :)

[Pavel Reichl]

On 09/22/2015 11:09 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 04:50:02PM -0400, Pavel Brezina wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Pavel Reichl" 
> > > To: [e-mail]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:31:45 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] confdb: warn if memcache_timeout > than entry_cache
> > >
> > > On 09/22/2015 10:25 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > > > On 09/21/2015 04:33 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > > > > Hello, please see simple patch attached.
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > the patch looks good in general. However, I'd like to rephrase the warning.
> > > > >          "%s is lesser then %s, sysdb will not be updated for
> > > > >
> > > > > users.\n",
> > > >                       ^lower
> > > >
> > > > How about:
> > > >
> > > > %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory cache
> > > > entry expires.
> > > >
> > > > %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory cache
> > > > entry gets expired.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > >
> > > Hello Pavel, thanks for comment. I updated the patch as you proposed.
> > >
> > > I did quick research on usage of smaller/lower/lesser and all seem to for
> > > correct for our case, but I agree that lower might sound more common.
> >
> > Hi,
> > I am not a native speaker but lesser sounds quite strange in this sentence. But I admit it may be my personal opinion and it can be grammatically correct (smaller sounds good to me as well).
> >
> > On the other hand the first sentence I proposed and that you chose for your patch (entry expires) seems strange to me as well and I suggested it anyway. I would personally pick "entry gets expired/becomes expired/is expired" but I think "expires" is grammatically correct here and it is shorter. Any native speaker wants to chime in here? :-)
>
> Please ping either Dan or Stephen on IRC to settle this down :)

I've asked ftweedal (who is Australian, but I suppose we can consider him as native English speaker anyway) for help. He proposed to use "%s is less than %s. Group records will not be updated before memory cache entry expires."

Please see updated patch attached.

Thanks ftweedal!
> sssd-devel mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel

[Pavel Březina]

On 09/23/2015 01:08 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> On 09/22/2015 11:09 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 04:50:02PM -0400, Pavel Brezina wrote:
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Pavel Reichl" 
> > > > To: [e-mail]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:31:45 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] confdb: warn if memcache_timeout > than
> > > > entry_cache
> > > >
> > > > On 09/22/2015 10:25 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > > > > On 09/21/2015 04:33 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > > > > > Hello, please see simple patch attached.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > the patch looks good in general. However, I'd like to rephrase the
> > > > > warning.
> > > > > >          "%s is lesser then %s, sysdb will not be updated for
> > > > > >
> > > > > > users.\n",
> > > > >                       ^lower
> > > > >
> > > > > How about:
> > > > >
> > > > > %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory
> > > > > cache
> > > > > entry expires.
> > > > >
> > > > > %s is lower then %s. User records will not be updated before memory
> > > > > cache
> > > > > entry gets expired.
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > >
> > > > Hello Pavel, thanks for comment. I updated the patch as you proposed.
> > > >
> > > > I did quick research on usage of smaller/lower/lesser and all seem
> > > > to for
> > > > correct for our case, but I agree that lower might sound more common.
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > I am not a native speaker but lesser sounds quite strange in this
> > > sentence. But I admit it may be my personal opinion and it can be
> > > grammatically correct (smaller sounds good to me as well).
> > >
> > > On the other hand the first sentence I proposed and that you chose
> > > for your patch (entry expires) seems strange to me as well and I
> > > suggested it anyway. I would personally pick "entry gets
> > > expired/becomes expired/is expired" but I think "expires" is
> > > grammatically correct here and it is shorter. Any native speaker
> > > wants to chime in here? :-)
> >
> > Please ping either Dan or Stephen on IRC to settle this down :)
>
> I've asked ftweedal (who is Australian, but I suppose we can consider
> him as native English speaker anyway) for help. He proposed to use "%s
> is less than %s. Group records will not be updated before memory cache
> entry expires."
>
> Please see updated patch attached.
>
> Thanks ftweedal!

Ack. Thank you!

[Jakub Hrozek]

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 08:55:11PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
> Ack. Thank you!

CI: http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/28/14/summary.html

* master: 3fb1ee96f508784d7e06f079111d4d32d401a99b

btw the ticket was in Backlog, not in the currently-in-progress 1.13.2,
so I just moved it.