@@ -1003,12 +1003,12 @@ table_index_fetch_end(struct IndexFetchTableData *scan)
10031003 * that tuple. Index AMs can use that to avoid returning that tid in future
10041004 * searches.
10051005 *
1006- * The difference between this function andtable_fetch_row_version is that
1007- * this function returns the currently visible version of a row if the AM
1008- * supports storing multiple row versions reachable via a single index entry
1009- * (like heap's HOT). Whereastable_fetch_row_version only evaluates the
1010- * tuple exactly at `tid`. Outside of index entry ->table tuple lookups,
1011- * table_tuple_fetch_row_version is what's usually needed.
1006+ * The difference between this function andtable_tuple_fetch_row_version()
1007+ *is that this function returns the currently visible version of a row if
1008+ *the AM supports storing multiple row versions reachable via a single index
1009+ *entry (like heap's HOT). Whereastable_tuple_fetch_row_version() only
1010+ *evaluates the tuple exactly at `tid`. Outside of index entry ->table tuple
1011+ *lookups, table_tuple_fetch_row_version() is what's usually needed.
10121012 */
10131013static inline bool
10141014table_index_fetch_tuple (struct IndexFetchTableData * scan ,
@@ -1062,8 +1062,9 @@ table_tuple_fetch_row_version(Relation rel,
10621062/*
10631063 * Verify that `tid` is a potentially valid tuple identifier. That doesn't
10641064 * mean that the pointed to row needs to exist or be visible, but that
1065- * attempting to fetch the row (e.g. with table_get_latest_tid() or
1066- * table_fetch_row_version()) should not error out if called with that tid.
1065+ * attempting to fetch the row (e.g. with table_tuple_get_latest_tid() or
1066+ * table_tuple_fetch_row_version()) should not error out if called with that
1067+ * tid.
10671068 *
10681069 * `scan` needs to have been started via table_beginscan().
10691070 */
@@ -1192,8 +1193,8 @@ table_tuple_complete_speculative(Relation rel, TupleTableSlot *slot,
11921193/*
11931194 * Insert multiple tuples into a table.
11941195 *
1195- * This is liketable_insert (), but inserts multiple tuples in one
1196- * operation. That's often faster than callingtable_insert () in a loop,
1196+ * This is liketable_tuple_insert (), but inserts multiple tuples in one
1197+ * operation. That's often faster than callingtable_tuple_insert () in a loop,
11971198 * because e.g. the AM can reduce WAL logging and page locking overhead.
11981199 *
11991200 * Except for taking `nslots` tuples as input, and an array of TupleTableSlots