Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

simple or global column names?

From: george young <gry(at)ll(dot)mit(dot)edu>
To: pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: simple or global column names?
Date: 2005-11-08 15:28:26
Message-ID: 20051108102826.1dfe7b32.gry@ll.mit.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice
[PostgreSQL 7.4RC2 on i686-pc-linux-gnu] [soon to upgrade to 8.x]

I have a simple schema design question.  I'm torn between: 

   create table steps(step text, step_version int, substep text, substep_version int);

and: 
   create table steps(step text, version int, substep text, substep_version int)

I.e., should a field in steps be "version" or "step_version"?  On one hand,
the "step_" prefix is redundant noise in this context, but for doing joins,
it seems like globally distinct names might make things clearer.  

Are there other advantages/disadvantages to these naming schemes?

My goals (in this major schema reorganization) are simplicty, clarity, and
in particular, to facilitate nieve users' read-only ODBC access through
Excel or other GUI clients.

-- George Young

-- 
"Are the gods not just?"  "Oh no, child.
What would become of us if they were?" (CSL)

Responses

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Moravec JanDate: 2005-11-08 16:11:47
Subject: Setting pgsql variable from query result
Previous:From: Wes WilliamsDate: 2005-11-08 12:58:46
Subject: Re: Upgrading from 8.0 to 8.1 (w32)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group