Thread: pgsql/doc/src/sgml admin.sgml advanced.sgml ar ...
CVSROOT: /home/projects/pgsql/cvsroot
Module name: pgsql
Changes by: petere@hub.org 01/01/13 18:58:55
Modified files:
doc/src/sgml : admin.sgml advanced.sgml array.sgml extend.sgml
indices.sgml inherit.sgml intro.sgml
libpq++.sgml libpq.sgml page.sgml plsql.sgml
programmer.sgml query.sgml syntax.sgml
tutorial.sgml user.sgml xaggr.sgml xfunc.sgml
xindex.sgml xtypes.sgml
doc/src/sgml/ref: alter_table.sgml cluster.sgml copy.sgml
create_index.sgml create_operator.sgml
create_rule.sgml create_type.sgml
create_view.sgml createuser.sgml delete.sgml
drop_type.sgml dropuser.sgml insert.sgml
select.sgml select_into.sgml unlisten.sgml
update.sgml vacuum.sgml
Log message:
Terminology cleanup: class -> table, instance -> row, attribute -> column,
etc.
> Log message: > Terminology cleanup: class -> table, instance -> row, attribute -> column, > etc. Yeeh. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Log message: > > Terminology cleanup: class -> table, instance -> row, attribute -> column, > > etc. > > Yeeh. sad, actually ... we try to be SQL complaint, yet we can't handle the terminology? :(
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>> Log message:
>>>> Terminology cleanup: class -> table, instance -> row, attribute -> column,
>>>> etc.
>>
>> Yeeh.
> sad, actually ... we try to be SQL complaint, yet we can't handle the
> terminology? :(
Eh? Table, row, column *are* the SQL terminology. The others are
leftovers from PostQuel, and it's been a long time since we've used
them consistently anyway.
I'm just glad someone was willing to do the gruntwork of changing
the docs ...
regards, tom lane
On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > > On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >>>> Log message: > >>>> Terminology cleanup: class -> table, instance -> row, attribute -> column, > >>>> etc. > >> > >> Yeeh. > > > sad, actually ... we try to be SQL complaint, yet we can't handle the > > terminology? :( > > Eh? Table, row, column *are* the SQL terminology. The others are > leftovers from PostQuel, and it's been a long time since we've used > them consistently anyway. Okay, then its definitely me confused here ... "The Practical SQL Handbook", which I don' thave in front of me ... it doesn't refer to things as table/row/column ... does it?
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > Log message: > > > Terminology cleanup: class -> table, instance -> row, attribute -> column, > > > etc. > > > > Yeeh. > > sad, actually ... we try to be SQL complaint, yet we can't handle the > terminology? :( Yes, I know we are baby-ing the terminology. My feeling is that this stuff is complicated enough, and we should make it as easy as possible, but I realize this is debatable. Someone brought this about my book's use of terminology. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > Log message: > > > > Terminology cleanup: class -> table, instance -> row, attribute -> column, > > > > etc. > > > > > > Yeeh. > > > > sad, actually ... we try to be SQL complaint, yet we can't handle the > > terminology? :( > > Yes, I know we are baby-ing the terminology. My feeling is that this > stuff is complicated enough, and we should make it as easy as possible, > but I realize this is debatable. > > Someone brought this about my book's use of terminology. As Tom brought up, I may be the one confused here ... but, our documentation should be using the *accurate* terminology ... if that is table/row/column, so be it, it was me confused ... if it is something else (class/instance/attribute), then *that* is what our documentation should be providing ... If you want simpilication/babying, switch to Microsoft ... if you want to learn/undertand, then use a real database ... How does Oracle refer to them? How does Informix? Sybase?
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
>> Eh? Table, row, column *are* the SQL terminology. The others are
>> leftovers from PostQuel, and it's been a long time since we've used
>> them consistently anyway.
> Okay, then its definitely me confused here ... "The Practical SQL
> Handbook", which I don' thave in front of me ... it doesn't refer to
> things as table/row/column ... does it?
I dunno about that book, but I do have the SQL spec in front of me,
and class/instance/attribute are not used in it. Table/row/column
are.
regards, tom lane
On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > >> Eh? Table, row, column *are* the SQL terminology. The others are > >> leftovers from PostQuel, and it's been a long time since we've used > >> them consistently anyway. > > > Okay, then its definitely me confused here ... "The Practical SQL > > Handbook", which I don' thave in front of me ... it doesn't refer to > > things as table/row/column ... does it? > > I dunno about that book, but I do have the SQL spec in front of me, > and class/instance/attribute are not used in it. Table/row/column > are. Can't ask more definitive then that ... thanks for clarifying and confiming ...
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > > > The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > > >> Eh? Table, row, column *are* the SQL terminology. The others are > > >> leftovers from PostQuel, and it's been a long time since we've used > > >> them consistently anyway. > > > > > Okay, then its definitely me confused here ... "The Practical SQL > > > Handbook", which I don' thave in front of me ... it doesn't refer to > > > things as table/row/column ... does it? > > > > I dunno about that book, but I do have the SQL spec in front of me, > > and class/instance/attribute are not used in it. Table/row/column > > are. > > Can't ask more definitive then that ... thanks for clarifying and > confiming ... I think relational algebra uses the terms relation/attribute and stuff. The standards themselves use the more common names table/column. I think Date's stuff uses the relational algebra names, and most academic papers do perhaps. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Bruce Momjian writes: > I think relational algebra uses the terms relation/attribute and stuff. > The standards themselves use the more common names table/column. I > think Date's stuff uses the relational algebra names, and most academic > papers do perhaps. It wouldn't be a problem if the terminology were used consistently but there was a clear tendency that newer and older documentation was getting out of sync. It looked downright silly in some situations. (CREATE TABLE creates a table, not a class, right?) -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/
> Bruce Momjian writes: > > > I think relational algebra uses the terms relation/attribute and stuff. > > The standards themselves use the more common names table/column. I > > think Date's stuff uses the relational algebra names, and most academic > > papers do perhaps. > > It wouldn't be a problem if the terminology were used consistently but > there was a clear tendency that newer and older documentation was getting > out of sync. It looked downright silly in some situations. (CREATE TABLE > creates a table, not a class, right?) Did you clean up the manual pages too? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Bruce Momjian writes: > Did you clean up the manual pages too? Yes, although the real man pages still need to be rebuilt from DocBook. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/