*Hi all,* I would like to initiate a discussion regarding the official English terminology for our dual-modeling capabilities in Apache IoTDB. Specifically, should we use *"Table Model"* and *"Tree Model"*, or *"Table Mode"* and *"Tree Mode"*?
After some consideration, I highly recommend adopting *"Table Model"* and *"Tree Model"*. Here is the reasoning based on classic database architecture: As we know, the standard *three-level schema architecture in database theory* consists of the External Schema (User Level), Conceptual Schema (Logical/Model Level), and Internal Schema (Physical Level). This structure ensures data independence by isolating user views from physical storage. In the context of IoTDB: - *Unified Physical Layer:* Both "Tree" and "Table" share the same underlying physical storage format (TsFile). - *Conceptual Distinction:* The primary difference lies in the *Conceptual Schema*—the way we model the data. Each modeling approach carries its own unique logic, constraints, and mappings. - *External Impact:* These different conceptual models further determine their respective External Schemas and query syntaxes. If we were to use "Mode," it might imply a superficial switch in "External Schema" or "syntax style." However, *"Model"* accurately reflects that we are providing two different logical frameworks for data representation on top of a unified storage engine. I would love to hear your thoughts on this. Do you agree with using "Model," or do you see any advantages to using "Mode"? *Best regards,* Yuan Tian
