Re: Naming Convention for Columns
Date: 1998/03/10
Message-ID: <3505ad61.266543_at_read.news.global.net.uk>#1/1
[Quoted] [Quoted] On Tue, 10 Mar 1998 12:52:07 GMT, jeff_kalchik_at_spammenot.mw.3com.com (Jeff Kalchik) wrote:
>
>While I appreciate your .sig line, I absolutely disagree with your
>naming convention. I'll fire anyone who pulls that kind of s**t
>working for me. It creates absolutely unmaintainable systems. I've
>got enough grief with underscores and dashes not being consistent; I
>don't need to worry about what's in T3.C47.
>
I assumed the poster was being ironic.
[Quoted] [Quoted] Having said that, I did work for an organisation once which had DB2 naming conventions where table and column names were limited to 8 characters. The first three characters were a system mnemonic, followed by a five digit number i.e. select xyz00024, xyz00057 from xyz11003. Received on Tue Mar 10 1998 - 00:00:00 CET