Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 20:35:28 -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: <20030316043528.GQ79234@perrin.int.nxad.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303141647200.2382-100000@peter.localdomain>
	<25320.1047690393@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20030315210321.GO79234@perrin.int.nxad.com>
	<15712.1047763882@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <15712.1047763882@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

> > How about:  s/(row|tuple)/record/
> 
> We do need two different terms: eliminating the distinction between
> a row and a version of a row is not going to improve matters.
> 
> I have nothing against the word "record", but it doesn't seem to
> help clarify this distinction ...

Well, if you want to get cognitive, "old record" likely carries a more
explicit and easy to understand mental picture than "old tuple" or
"version of a row."  I guess the same phrasing could apply to tuple or
row, but record has historically seemed like the easiest term for
people to grasp.

  (new|old)? (record|row|tuple)

It's not a one word zinger, but (new|old)? is just a description for
the entity that the mind has an understanding or conceptupal picture
of.  -sc

-- 
Sean Chittenden