Re: Index

From: J.O. Aho <user_at_example.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 22:35:10 +0200
Message-ID: <gpk0juFfauuU1_at_mid.individual.net>


[Quoted] On 21/07/2019 21.22, Tony Mountifield wrote:
> In article <qh2bl2$9ii$3_at_dont-email.me>,
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp_at_invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 21/07/2019 09:35, Axel Schwenke wrote:

[Quoted] >>> There are however drawbacks from this strategy of adding "perfect" indexes
>>> for your queries. For one there is a limit of 64 indexes per table. Then
>>> indexes need space, both on disk and in memory. And finally indexes need
>>> maintenance whenever data is modified (rows inserted/deleted/altered).
>>>
>> The plural of index is indices.

> Indexes and indices are both accepted and widely used plurals of the noun
> index. Both appear throughout the English-speaking world, but indices prevails
> in varieties of English from outside North America, while indexes is more
> common in American and Canadian English. Meanwhile, indices is generally
> preferred in mathematical, financial, and technical contexts, while indexes is
> relatively common in general usage.
>
> Neither form is wrong. Both have been in English many centuries (and though
> indexes is now most common in American English, it predates the United States
> by centuries). It’s true that indices is the plural of index in Latin, but
> index is an English word when English speakers use it—and it is a longstanding
> one at that—so we can pluralize it according to the conventions of English.

MySQL, Sybase, Oracle, MS SQL Server, and postgresql documentation uses 'indexes' when talking about index in plural, so I would go so far that indexes is the more accepted spelling when talking about databases.

-- 

  //Aho
Received on Sun Jul 21 2019 - 22:35:10 CEST

Original text of this message