Yes, but are you really going to add the app_ prefix to all the tables in your application while you're developing it? The reason I've seen this done most of the time is so you can deploy multiple applications in one database. Databases are cheap - get a 2nd instance. ;-)
Another reason I don't like is because roller does it, but they only did it halfway, so there's a number of tables in my database with roller_ and the rest don't have the prefix. It's ugly IMO. +--------------------------+ | Tables_in_roller | +--------------------------+ | autoping | | bookmark | | entryattribute | | folder | | folderassoc | | newsfeed | | pingcategory | | pingqueueentry | | pingtarget | | rag_config | | rag_entry | | rag_group | | rag_group_subscription | | rag_subscription | | referer | | roller_audit_log | | roller_comment | | roller_hitcounts | | roller_properties | | roller_tasklock | | roller_user_permissions | | roller_weblogentrytag | | roller_weblogentrytagagg | | rollerconfig | | rolleruser | | usercookie | | userrole | | weblogcategory | | weblogcategoryassoc | | weblogentry | | webpage | | website | +--------------------------+ Matt On 3/14/07, tibi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
great more votes for app_* ;-) there are only 3 tables i would change it to app_user app_role app_user_role and all problems are gone. no reserved words and only very rarely problems with existing db's its clear and simpel tibi Nathan Anderson wrote: > This all seems like familiar ground ;) > > I like the prefix idea. It's always kinda bugged me that the only > table with a prefix was "app_user". It's like, "one of these things > is not like the others." ;) > > In an ideal world I would like to see all the tables have a matching > prefix that is configured somewhere with a default of "app_" or > something similar. But I have no idea how hard that is to do.. :/ > > > Nathan > > Matt Raible wrote: >> Yeah, but the problem with that is we get into the whole >> plural-table-names debate. I chose app_user because of Oracle >> originally. I thought "role" was a keyword too, but apparently not. >> >> Matt >> >> On 3/14/07, Sanjiv Jivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I prefer "users" as "user" is a reserved word in Oracle. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/14/07, Matt Raible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> > Are you using Hibernate? If so, there's a NamingStrategy feature you >>> > can use to add your own prefixes. >>> > >>> > I'm considering renaming "app_user" to "user" to be more standard. >>> > Since these names can be changed, it seems to make sense, no? >>> > >>> > Matt >>> > >>> > On 3/14/07, tibi < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> > > hi matt and others, >>> > > >>> > > i use appfuse on an existing database structure. appfuse uses 3 >>> tables. >>> > > i would like to see that the naming off these tables would be >>> kind of >>> > > unique (like appfuse_rol, appfuse_user_rol) >>> > > >>> > > just an idea... >>> > > >>> > > ciao, >>> > > >>> > > tibi >>> > > >>> > > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > http://raibledesigns.com >>> > >>> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- http://raibledesigns.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
