From: Karsten Hilbert <Karsten.Hilbert@gmx.net>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: What are the (various) best practices/opinions for table/column/constraint naming?
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2008 11:58:35 +0100
Message-ID: <20080209105835.240720@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47ACC3E5.2060207@kensystem.com>
References: <47ACC3E5.2060207@kensystem.com>
Speaking on behalf of the GNUmed schema.
The type of thing comes first for consistency.
primary key: pk
Some might argue pk_<table_name> is preferrable such that
in joins one ist not forced to use column aliases. We do
in such cases. The "... where table.pk = ..." just seems
soo intuitive.
foreign key: fk_<foreign_table_name>
This then affords fk_<foreign_table_name>_<foreign_table_column>
should that ever be needed (likely an indication of bad design).
indices: idx_<table>_<column>
sequences: so far we relied on PG giving us a name
constraints: named by what they *do*, such as ensure_..._consistency
functions: f_<purpose>
trigger functions: trf_<purpose>
trigger: tr_<purpose>
> And other naming conventions suggest using mixed/camel case
> (quoted-identifiers)
We don't use mixed case as that would *require* quoting which is
liable to being forgotten.
Not much help, just our convention.
Karsten
--
Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
Ideal für Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: Karsten.Hilbert@gmx.net
Subject: Re: What are the (various) best practices/opinions for table/column/constraint naming?
In-Reply-To: <20080209105835.240720@gmx.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox