Re: Naming conventions?

On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 18:05:33 +0200, "Norbert Vossiek" <norbert.vossiek_at_gmx.li> wrote:

>True!
>
>I like table synonyms much more.
>
>SELECT a.id, b.id
>FROM employee a, salary b
>WHERE a.id = b.id
>
>is easy to read and easy to write also if you deal with some 10+ tables.
>

ok, that's the perfect example, why I don't like aliases. When looking at the SELECT-clause and/or the WHERE-clause, I got to decode what "a" means. Especially with 10 tables, some inline views etc, all aliased as t1 .. t10, v1 .. v5, the WHERE clause gets pretty ununderstandable. The next step would be to give my tables names like T_1 .. T_n with attributes atr0001 .. atr0002 ..

;-)

<SNIP>

>Should I name the n:m table column emp_id? Or emp_cst_id? Or ecu_id? How to
>name the cus_id then? Or did you allready decide to brake the rule (only
>once, shure!) and to name this column cust_id (which I found in soooo many
>real world systems)?
>

CREATE TABLE my_n_m_table
(ecu_cus_id NUMBER,
 ecu_emp_id NUMBER)
/

works pretty well, no breaking of rules necessary

Marc Blum
mailto:marc_at_marcblum.de
http://www.marcblum.de Received on Mon Jun 03 2002 - 13:26:17 CDT