Tom Lane writes:
> Well, "row version" isn't a particularly standard term either. I'd
> prefer a one-word term.
I think "row version" is the only logical and self-explanatory term that
can be derived from "row" and "multiversion concurrency control". And
even though it's two words, it's just as short as most other terms we
could come up with. But more importantly, it should get the message
across to most users, while most other suggestions would simply be another
ambiguous word.
> (Anyone know what Oracle calls 'em?)
I don't think Oracle really has this concept, because their
multiversioning is not implemented with a nonoverwriting storage manager.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net