Re: Terminology question

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 21:06:55 GMT
Message-ID: <Pz0Lg.8881$9u.122021@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>

Marshall wrote:

> Bob Badour wrote:
>

>>There are a number of names that have been used for similar things:
>>channels, connections, sessions. For some reason, connect seems to have
>>taken hold among database implementations. I find "connecting to a
>>database" wrong-minded and borderline anthropomorphizing.

>
> I speculate it could have to do with the fact that typically a dbms
> is accessed over a network, and in TCP terminology, opening
> a socket is called "connecting."

One could also speculate that it was chosen to distinguish the activity from opening a file. Regardless, I think the choice of word was arbitrary, and I don't see any theoretical underpinning to the choice. My guess is different products use different keywords. 'Client-server' was popular when ODBC etc. were created so that might have influenced the choice. Received on Mon Sep 04 2006 - 16:06:55 CDT