Yes, the situation you describe can be tricky. I have found however that it is better to bite the bullet and rename the columns. When I implement enhancements I always produce scripts for any schema updates that are necessary which I test thoroughly before using on production systems and I always backup the database before running them. If you follow this practice consistently it becomes fairly easy to release the changes.
Now if the production sites had been running for a long time and the clients had bunches of sql scripts that referred to the table structures then it might be a different story. If this situation is going to arise it is often useful to define some views for the clients to use for this purpose - if done correctly this has the potential to isolate them from some of the future schema changes. Cheers, Scott > From: Wesley Gamble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: "Turbine Torque Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 18:13:09 -0500 > To: "'Turbine Torque Users List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: Does Torque allow table/column names to vary by platform? > > Scott, > > I wholeheartedly agree with your statement. However, there is something of a > maintainability issue here. This particular application already has customers > who may have many thousands of records in their databases already. In order > to change column names on existing customers so that they can operate on > either platform seamlessly, you have to make a new table, re-insert the data > into the new table, rename the new table to be the name of the old table, and > drop the old table. > > Actually, I guess if you did this correctly, it wouldn't necessarily take > that long. > > I was trying to avoid having to force a reload on all of these tables (there > are six of them). > > Wes > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Eade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 5:54 PM > To: Turbine Torque Users List > Subject: Re: Does Torque allow table/column names to vary by platform? > > > Wes, > > I am fairly sure the answer to your question is No. Wouldn't it be much > easier to not use the Oracle reserved words in MS SQL as well? This way you > would have consistent column names across platforms, thereby making > administration and maintenance easier. It would also mean that you could > use torque without making what would be IMHO a rather crazy change (crazy > because of the confusion that might result). > > HTH, > > Scott > >> From: Wesley Gamble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: "Turbine Torque Users List" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 17:36:42 -0500 >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Does Torque allow table/column names to vary by platform? >> >> All, >> >> Thanks in advance for any help. >> >> I am in the middle of an application port to Oracle and we have several >> namespace collisions with Oracle reserved words (duh!). >> I looked at Torque a few weeks ago and quite liked it. However, it >> appeared that it did not support mapping an object or attribute to > multiple >> table/column names which could vary by platform. >> >> For example, an object's attribute which mapped to <table>.UID in MS SQL >> Server is fine, but in Oracle, the column must be named differently >> because UID is a reserved word in Oracle. So I'd like to be able to map >> the same attribute to both <table>.UID and <table>.<something_not_UID> >> >> Is this possible with the current rev. of Torque? >> >> If not, perhaps I should work on that :). >> >> Thanks, >> Wes Gamble >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> For additional commands, e-mail: >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
