Not "TICK" as in "Deer-" or "Wood-" (which look like corn kernels with legs
when they dig in and suck your blood), but as in "- vs. The Uncommon Cold",
"- and Arthur", and "SPN!".
http://www.thetick.ws/
:)
Now back to naming new databases...
Rich
Rich JesseSystem/
Raj
TICK does not stand for anything so interesting or pleasant in
Wisconsin.
Sorry Rich, just a little upper midwestern humor.
Dennis Williams
DBA, 40%OCP, 100% DBA
Lifetouch, Inc. Eden Prairie, Minnesota.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003
Title: RE: Database naming conventions
We do have a TICK ... it stands for sportsTICKer ...
Raj
__
Rajendra Jamadagni MIS, ESPN Inc.
Rajendra dot Jamadagni at ESPN dot com
Any opinion expressed here is personal and doesn&#
Title: RE: Database naming conventions
Thanks
everyone for your opinions. I believe I have some good examples of why not
to use ora.
This
list is great!
-Original Message-From: Jamadagni, Rajendra
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003
3:59 PMTo
Now my left-brain is arguing with the right-brain. Some of our test/dev DBs
are (or have been):
MULTI, ARENA, ORBIT, RALLY, and EMPIRE
(the word "playground" was too long...) And I've created at one point or
another:
DUPLO, AMIGA, PLINK, CHEWY, HOPS, EDGE, ENCLAVE, and TICK.
No one's really a
Title: RE: Database naming conventions
We use following syntax ...
* FAM -- ABC Family Production DB
* OLDFAM -- essentially FAM but as of 2AM today (refreshed daily or on demand)
* FAMQA -- FAM QA
* FAMTEST -- FAM User Acceptance
* FAMDEV -- Fam development
This works good for
;
> Ask him if he name all his tables "TAB...", java class "Java...",
> his pet "CAT..." or "DOG..." etc?
>
> Richard
>
> -Original Message-
> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 1:44 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
>
he database "ora."
I understand the reasoning behind and the desire for naming
conventions.
What happens when your shop decides to go with MySQL (as this list has
been talking about)... will he want to rename the database to
mysqlt24x7? will he even be allowed to have a database n
Title: RE: Database naming conventions
how about just an 'o'
od24x7
op24x7
you could then use 'u' for udb and 'm' for MySQL, and 's' for SQL Server.
-Original Message-
From: Rachel Carmichael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday,
Melissa,
My naming convention is to have the host name and the database instance
follow it. I have been using ORACLE_SID's that are numeric for years since v6
which helps therefore the 02 database on the server brahms.vicr.com is named
brahms2. Makes life easier identifying where you are. H
there is no reason to call the database "ora."
I understand the reasoning behind and the desire for naming
conventions.
What happens when your shop decides to go with MySQL (as this list has
been talking about)... will he want to rename the database to
mysqlt24x7? will he even be
Title: RE: Database naming conventions
Thanks, I Talking about the SID.
I got my smile for the day, putting version etc. in would certainly add to the absurdity.
-Original Message-
From: Jay Hostetter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:59 AM
To
Melissa - You didn't mention which system you are on. My comments apply more
to Unix.
Oracle warns not to make the instance name too long. Formerly they
recommended you keep it to 4 characters. Not sure how that would apply
today. It does make your processes long.
My #1 objective is to make
e-From: Godlewski, Melissa
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, February 14,
2003 9:24 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list
ORACLE-LSubject: Database naming conventions
List,
I'm
use to using a standard D=development T=test P=production. So for a
database newly created
Are we talking SID or connect string? I seem to remember that there was (or is on
certain OSs) a limit to the length of the SID - so I tend to keep the SIDs short and
sweet. If it is the connect string - then who is it that needs to know it is an
Oracle database? The user? Why? The DBA? Er
List,
I'm
use to using a standard D=development T=test P=production. So for a
database newly created on development it would be called something like
D24X7. Then when it was created on Production it would be called
P24X7. Or along similar lines.
I'm
working with an other DBA who wa
> Shibu MB wrote:
>
> Hi all...
>
> What are the naming conventions u guys follow when
> designing a database ???.Can anybody send me a general document on
> this. I am trying to make the attribute name unique in my database
> but i dunno
Hi
all...
What are the naming conventions u guys follow when designing a database
???.Can anybody send me a general document on this. I am trying to
make the attribute name unique in my database but i
dunno what naming convention i have to follow for this
Oracle seems to be inconsistant in the way it names
roles:
SQL> select role, GRANTED_ROLE from ROLE_ROLE_PRIVS;
ROLE GRANTED_ROLE
-- --
DBADELETE_CATALOG_ROLE
DBA
o: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
>
>
> Many thanks to all for your feedback and advice! As I suspected,
> naming
> conventions are really a matter of someone's personal preference,
> and
> what's really important is to keep it standard and consistent.
>
xt what kind of
> > thing
> > > a
> > > thing is. For example, consider: "select a.flarg from bloing a
> > where
> > > a.croopoo > 7". This can be understood by syntactical context
> (even
> > > with
> > > the nonsense names),
CTED]> writes
>Many thanks to all for your feedback and advice! As I suspected, naming
>conventions are really a matter of someone's personal preference, and
>what's really important is to keep it standard and consistent.
>
>One [hopefully] last question: What's th
by' in a report.
Jared
"kkennedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
07/30/2002 06:08 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject:RE: Table Naming Convent
TED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
07/31/2002 07:48 AM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: Table Naming Conventions
Many thanks to all for your feedback and advice! As I suspected, naming
con
-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 7:49 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Many thanks to all for your feedback and advice! As I suspected, naming
conventions are really a matter of someone's personal preference, and
what's really important is to keep i
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject:RE: Table Naming Conventions
My supervisor/client wants object types in names - except tables like I_
for indexes. Why do you say stay away from this?
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:10 PM
To: Multiple re
]
Web:www.compuware.com
-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 12:18 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject:RE: Table Naming Conventions
Gary, you said:
"What's the consensus (if there is such a
thing) on plural vs. singular table names?"
t
nce, Feb 9-12 Dallas
-Original Message-
Chambers
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 9:49 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Many thanks to all for your feedback and advice! As I suspected, naming
conventions are really a matter of someone's personal preference, and
what's
en
> > with
> > the nonsense names), without having to rename "bloing" to
> > "bloing_table".
> >
> > Most of the embedding of type names into object names that I've seen
> > has
> > been implemented by users who were inexperienced at
m/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI
USA
> -Original Message-
> From: Cary Millsap [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:03 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: RE: Table Naming Conventions
esday, July 31, 2002 10:49 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Many thanks to all for your feedback and advice! As I suspected, naming
conventions are really a matter of someone's personal preference, and
what's really important is to keep it standard and consistent.
One [hopeful
mposium on OracleR System Performance, Feb 9-12 Dallas
-Original Message-
Chambers
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 9:49 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Many thanks to all for your feedback and advice! As I suspected, naming
conventions are really a matter of someone's pers
Sussex, WI USA
> -Original Message-
> From: Cary Millsap [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:54 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: RE: Table Naming Conventions
>
>
> I just think it's a waste. You can tell by context wha
-Original Message-
> From: Cary Millsap [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:03 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: RE: Table Naming Conventions
>
>
> I don't like such prefixes because they make it easier to lie or m
Many thanks to all for your feedback and advice! As I suspected, naming
conventions are really a matter of someone's personal preference, and
what's really important is to keep it standard and consistent.
One [hopefully] last question: What's the consensus (if there is such a
t
where
> > a.croopoo > 7". This can be understood by syntactical context (even
> > with
> > the nonsense names), without having to rename "bloing" to
> > "bloing_table".
> >
> > Most of the embedding of type names into object names that I
gt; > I just think it's a waste. You can tell by
> context what kind of
> > thing
> > > a
> > > thing is. For example, consider: "select a.flarg
> from bloing a
> > where
> > > a.croopoo > 7". This can be understood by
> syntactica
s that I've seen
> has
> been implemented by users who were inexperienced at the time they
> created the standard. They were worried that without embedding the
> type
> name into the object name, they might forget what kind of object it
> was.
> ...Most such naming conventi
Thing", or even "tHiNG" in your developers' SQL. But don't make
> > > developers type stuff like this...
> > >
> > > select "Name" from "Thing" where "Id" = y /* won't work
> > without
> > > &
nse names), without having to rename "bloing" to
> > "bloing_table".
> >
> > Most of the embedding of type names into object names that I've seen
> > has
> > been implemented by users who were inexperienced at the time they
> > created the s
without having to rename "bloing" to
> "bloing_table".
>
> Most of the embedding of type names into object names that I've seen
> has
> been implemented by users who were inexperienced at the time they
> created the standard. They were worried that without e
y: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
07/30/2002 02:29 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject:RE: Table Naming Conventions
My supervisor/client wants object types in names - except tables like I_
fo
names into object names that I've seen
> has
> been implemented by users who were inexperienced at the time they
> created the standard. They were worried that without embedding the
> type
> name into the object name, they might forget what kind of object it
> was.
> ...Most such namin
37 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject:Table Naming Conventions
All...
Will some of you please provide some insight on your table
naming
conventions? I'm in the very early planning stages of
rt of the
name?
Jared
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
07/30/2002 02:29 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: Table Naming Conventions
My supervisor/client wants
Subject: RE: Table Naming Conventions
My supervisor/client wants object types in names - except tables like I_
for indexes. Why do you say stay away from this?
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:10 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Here's a start. No
st of the embedding of type names into object names that I've seen
has
been implemented by users who were inexperienced at the time they
created the standard. They were worried that without embedding the
type
name into the object name, they might forget what kind of object it
was.
...Most suc
otsos Enterprises, Ltd.
> http://www.hotsos.com
>
> Upcoming events:
> - NCOAUG Training Day, Aug 16 Chicago
> - Miracle Database Forum, Sep 20-22 Middlefart Denmark
> - 2003 Hotsos Symposium on OracleR System Performance, Feb 9-12
> Dallas
>
>
>
> -Original
gt; http://www.hotsos.com
>
> Upcoming events:
> - NCOAUG Training Day, Aug 16 Chicago
> - Miracle Database Forum, Sep 20-22 Middlefart Denmark
> - 2003 Hotsos Symposium on OracleR System Performance, Feb 9-12
> Dallas
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> Chambers
Title: RE: Table Naming Conventions
My supervisor/client wants object types in names - except tables like I_ for indexes. Why do you say stay away from this?
-Original Message-
From: Cary Millsap [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:10 PM
To: Multiple recipients
s Symposium on OracleR System Performance, Feb 9-12 Dallas
-Original Message-
Chambers
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 3:37 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
All...
Will some of you please provide some insight on your table naming
conventions? I'm in the very early plannin
All...
Will some of you please provide some insight on your table naming
conventions? I'm in the very early planning stages of what will likely
be a large and complex schema (IT asset inventory). I have a chance to
start it correctly. TIA
Gary Cha
hi!
from my experience of haveing the same data or data model
on different DB brands and platforms it is wise wiser wisest
- cause you never know what the management is going to
buy next - to stick to the following naming conventions
for identifiers:
+ all identifiers in uppercase
+ not more
07/29/2002 09:15 AM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject:RE: naming conventions for Oracle/Unix vs. SQL Server
Paula:
The mixed case for Oracle does not matter, as Oracle is not case
I come from a Unix/Shell/Perl/Java background where exact case match is
important. Which is why it's s apparent that MS's lack of case
sensitivity bugs me :)
I recently had a similar discussion with a developer, who was absolutely
puzzled that case-sensitivity was an issue because his onl
Suzy - it isn't just MS_LAND that uses mixed-case. i've seen more than one
non-M$ shop take advantage of that in their namingConvetions. shell
scripts, perl, java, and even other non-M$ databases - Sybase on HP-UX for
example.
i do however agree with the rest of the posts - probably not a good
Title: RE: naming conventions for Oracle/Unix vs. SQL Server
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Please help. I work in an organization where we have both
> SQL Server on NT and Oracle on Unix. SQL Server and
> developers who are u
Definately underscores, if simply just to break the habit of developers
assuming that mixed-case means something outside of MS-land. While
SQL-Server does allow/display/use objects in mixed-case format, forcing
that into Oracle *can* be done, but it's a bad idea. The Oracle data
dictionary stor
Title: RE: naming conventions for Oracle/Unix vs. SQL Server
Paula:
The mixed case for Oracle does not matter,
as Oracle is not case sensitive. The
column names are stored in uppercase within the data dictionary. However, for SQL Server, the case sensitivity
of column names is
The only way to insert a column name in mixed case with Oracle is to enclose
the create statements column names in "double-quotes".. This also means that
when selecting from the created table, you have to enclose the mixed case
column name in double quotes as well.. Ad-hoc type queries could go wr
Title: RE: naming conventions for Oracle/Unix vs. SQL Server
Paula,
Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but if you create tables and
columns with mixed case within Oracle, then your developers will need to refer
them surrounded by double quotes: like:
SQL> create table &q
Title: RE: naming conventions for Oracle/Unix vs. SQL Server
Guys,
Please help. I work in an organization where we have both SQL Server on NT and Oracle on Unix. SQL Server and developers who are used to GUI's in NT like column names to have mixed case with no underscores. The Unix
62 matches
Mail list logo
