Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 13:03:21 -0800
From: Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Row vs. tuple
Message-ID: <20030315210321.GO79234@perrin.int.nxad.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303141647200.2382-100000@peter.localdomain>
	<25320.1047690393@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <25320.1047690393@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

> > In some places the documentation uses the term "tuple" to mean
> > "row version" (in the MVCC sense).  This choice of terms is
> > puzzling me; where does it come from?  In the literature available
> > to me, the term "tuple" is used as the mathematical equivalent of
> > "row", meaning that table/row/column parallels
> > relation/tuple/attribute.
> 
> Well, "row version" isn't a particularly standard term either.  I'd
> prefer a one-word term.  I think that the use of "tuple" for this can be
> traced back to the Berkeley code.

How about:  s/(row|tuple)/record/

A "record" is a much less theoretical/mathematical term that I've had
good success in using when describing basic table theory to lay
people.  Seems easier to grasp on the uptake than a row (rows are
confused with columns if you're not familiar with databases, math, or
matrices.  "Do rows go vertically or horizontally?") or tuple
(heavily mathematical term or term used in DB theory, but no where
else).  A record, on the other hand, is something that everyone has a
conceptual picture of.  -sc

-- 
Sean Chittenden