| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Josh Kupershmidt" <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: psql: bogus descriptions displayed by \d+ |
| Date: | 2011-08-04 19:20:51 |
| Message-ID: | 4E3AAAC3020000250003FAB3@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> According to scientific-ish database literature, a table is a
> relation and vice versa.
I've generally understood the terms more like what is described near
the top of this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relation_%28database%29
"In SQL, [...] a relation variable is called a table."
I'll admit that how these terms are treated depends very much on the
source, and we should define our terms to avoid confusion. But
defining a relation as set of records, and a table as a variable
which holds a maintainable "concrete" relation (or something more or
less to that effect) makes some sense to me.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | daveg | 2011-08-04 19:41:34 | Re: error: could not find pg_class tuple for index 2662 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-08-04 19:06:43 | Re: Transient plans versus the SPI API |