Re: Field naming: Same name represents different data
From: - g r e g - <gwarnick_at_fhcrc.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:18:23 -0800
Message-ID: <3E5D4B3F.7090204_at_fhcrc.org>
>
> I am going to look into some vendor conventions about postfixes like
> "_id", "_code", "_date", etc. Teradata has an internal set of
> conventions with definitions and I'll bet other people do too. Now,
> we jnly have to get them into ISO-11179 and approved ....
>
>
>
> It's that damn "serial killer" thing again, isn't it? Eat one,
> little, tiny baby and that's all people remember about you! You don't
> even have to finish all of it!! :))
Received on Thu Feb 27 2003 - 00:18:23 CET
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:18:23 -0800
Message-ID: <3E5D4B3F.7090204_at_fhcrc.org>
Is this Joe Celko? If so, thanks for your writings and articles. You have my support to eat as many teeny-tiny babies as you'd like, just keep up the good DB work.
greg
--CELKO-- wrote:
>>>That is just what I was seeking! [ISO-11179] << >>
>
> I am going to look into some vendor conventions about postfixes like
> "_id", "_code", "_date", etc. Teradata has an internal set of
> conventions with definitions and I'll bet other people do too. Now,
> we jnly have to get them into ISO-11179 and approved ....
>
>
>>>I may be new, but I recognize your name, << >>
>
> It's that damn "serial killer" thing again, isn't it? Eat one,
> little, tiny baby and that's all people remember about you! You don't
> even have to finish all of it!! :))
Received on Thu Feb 27 2003 - 00:18:23 CET