Welcome to the dBforums forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support.

If you prefer not to see double-underlined words and corresponding ads, place your cursor
here for ContentLink opt out.

Go Back  dBforums > General > Database Concepts & Design > database naming conventions

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-07, 11:29
Panoy Panoy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 56
database naming conventions

Hi to all,

What are the database naming conventions that is widely accepted in the database world? I just want to ask if what is the good way to name database, tables and fields? Do we go with the plural form or the singular one?

Is it just a matter of personal preference or it doesn't matter what you choose, as long as you do it consistently?

Thanks and god bless.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-07, 11:37
r937 r937 is offline
SQL Consultant
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 13,556
yes, consistency is important

tbl_you tbl_know tbl_what tbl_really tbl_annoys tbl_me? tbl_when tbl_people tbl_put tbl_"tbl" tbl_as tbl_a tbl_prefix tbl_in tbl_all tbl_their tbl_table tbl_names

how come these people never put "col" as the prefix on column names?

consistency is important, and so is common sense

as for singular/plural, my preference is plural table names, because tables usually have more than one row in them
__________________
r937.com | rudy.ca

pre-order my book Simply SQL from Amazon
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-07, 11:48
Panoy Panoy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 56
Hahahahahha...that was good

Well, usually there is some usefulness in that, i think...

The "tbl" sometimes help differentiate objects in your database..

Maybe you could attest to that

Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-07, 11:55
blindman blindman is offline
World Class Flame Warrior
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 9,291
You should not different between objects in your naming convention. That mixes the logical and physical designs, and can lead to inconsistencies later in development.
__________________
If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.

blindman
http://sqlblindman.googlepages.com/main
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-07, 13:27
healdem healdem is offline
Jaded Developer
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: out on a limb
Posts: 5,460
naming conventions
..the return of a perrenial favourite
...here are some earlier contributions on naming conventions
__________________
Warning
May! contain traces of NUT. people with NUT allergies should not pay attention to any of the above
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09-25-07, 12:52
certus certus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 669
Google "ISO 11179-5". It is the international standards organization's naming convention.
__________________
visit: relationary
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On