X-Original-To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F088D474E44
	for <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 20:06:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2F16Xub025321;
	Fri, 14 Mar 2003 20:06:33 -0500 (EST)
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Row vs. tuple 
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303141647200.2382-100000@peter.localdomain> 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303141647200.2382-100000@peter.localdomain>
Comments: In-reply-to Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
	message dated "Sat, 15 Mar 2003 01:37:10 +0100"
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 20:06:33 -0500
Message-ID: <25320.1047690393@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Archive-Number: 200303/26
X-Sequence-Number: 1704

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> 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.

I concede that it's not standard usage anyplace else ... but the whole
concept of row versions isn't real standard in most DBs.

(Anyone know what Oracle calls 'em?)

			regards, tom lane