if you don't change it from table, what about putting a huge comment
in the config file with the FAQ entry in it.
On 21/06/2009, at 9:32 AM, Sandeep Tata wrote:
I'd like for us to continue with "Table" as well.
I agree with Alexander's argument for what "namespaces" mean for most
CS domains.
Moving up a notch to a "database" is also confusing (Do we also have
tables? Are there tablespaces? Different storage engines for each
tablespace?)
We'll have to think of new names for columns and supercolumns too ---
I'd rather we stayed with "Table"
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Chris
Goffinet<[email protected]> wrote:
I think we should keep it as 'table'. It's understood everywhere.
I've
always even heard BigTable call it a Table? I think namespace might
just be
more confusing.
On Jun 20, 2009, at 6:54 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
Since we're proposing things that break stuff this weekend... :)
I think we should rename table to namespace in the config file.
Calling it "table" confuses people coming from an rdbms background
(i.e. just about everyone).
-Jonathan
--
Ian Holsman
[email protected]
