On 6 Dec 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/6/06, John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/6/06 12:44 AM, Clayton Scott wrote: >>> 2. create a sequence called <tablename>_seq >> >> That's the crux of it. It looks like I'll have to just pick a naming scheme >> and say, "If you deviate from this, don't try to use RDBO's 'serial' column >> type with oracle." > > Convention Manager? (It's a database design convention, right?) > > Every oracle dba I know does name the sequences that way > (it's a sample of 2, but they don't even know each other!). > > At least the literature is consistent in using the _seq naming convention.
I would be OK with an abort from RDBO if I use 'serial' without the right sequence setup. But RDBO should allow an override of the '%s_seq' name. Ted ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Rose-db-object mailing list Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
