Alvaro, I know that you are joking, but I want to impress on everyone: please don't feel like anyone here is breaking anything when it comes to modifying the content and structure of this glossary.
I do have technical writing experience, but everyone else here is a subject matter expert when it comes to the world of databases and how this one in particular functions.
> > Jürgen mentioned off-list that the man page doesn't build. I was going to > > look into that, but if anyone has more familiarity with that, I'm listening.
> Looking at this some more, I'm not sure anything needs to be done for man > pages.
Yeah, I don't think he was saying that we needed to do anything to produce a glossary man page; rather that the "make man" command failed. I tried it here, and indeed it failed. But on further investigation, after a "make maintainer-clean" it no longer failed. I'm not sure what to make of it, but it seems that this patch needn't concern itself with that.
I gave a read through the first few actual definitions. It's a much slower work than I thought! Attached you'll find the first few edits that I propose.
Looking at the definition of "Aggregate" it seemed weird to have it stand as a verb infinitive. I looked up other glossaries, found this one https://www.gartner.com/en/information-technology/glossary?glossaryletter=T and realized that when they do verbs, they put the present participle (-ing) form. So I changed it to "Aggregating", and split out the "Aggregate function" into its own term.
In Atomic, there seemed to be excessive use of <glossterm> in the definitions. Style guides seem to suggest to do that only the first time you use a term in a definition. I removed some markup.
I'm not sure about some terms such as "analytic" and "backend server". I put them in XML comments for now.
The other changes should be self-explanatory.
It's hard to review work from a professional tech writer. I'm under the constant impression that I'm ruining somebody's perfect end product, making a fool of myself.