Re: We do have names of relationships

Maybe I don't understand the problem. I though you were saying that when you looked in Oracle, your foreign keys had names like SYS_Cnnn. If that's so you can name your foreign keys in ERwin using a method like I mentioned.

Van

Mark Malakanov <markmal_at_chat.ru> wrote in message news:8evgks$tqe$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <uFGQ4.46$v%5.7713_at_newshog.newsread.com>,
> "Van Messner" <vmessner_at_bestweb.net> wrote:
> > If you don't enter a name in ERwin, then Oracle uses its own default
 naming
> > scheme which is SYS_Cnnnnnn. I don't have ERwin here in front of me
 but
> > probably if you right click or double click on the relationship line
 you'll
> > get a dialog box allowing you to enter a name.
> >
> > Van
> >
> > Mark Malakanov <markmal_at_chat.ru> wrote in message
> > news:8evbtk$obd$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > We have names for every relationship in phisical diagram.
> > > But RI constraints in database have "deafult" names like SYS_C001234
> > > How to fix this Erwin behaviour?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Mark Malakanov
> > > Oracle DBA
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > Before you buy.
> >
> >
>
> --
> Mark Malakanov
> Oracle DBA
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Received on Sun May 07 2000 - 00:00:00 CEST