Re: i have table

On 10/4/06, Erik Jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Aaron Bono wrote:
> > On 10/4/06, *Erik Jones* <erik(at)myemma(dot)com <mailto:erik(at)myemma(dot)com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > There is one non-SQL related reason that I like to be able to order
> > columns, at least the way they are displayed whenever the table is
> > described: human comprehension. For example, I like to group all
> > keys
> > in a table before data, that includes primary as well as foreign
> > keys.
> > So, say I'm building on to an existing application and I need to do
> an
> > ALTER TABLE on an existing table to add a foreign key to an existing
> > table. I'd like that key to be listed with the other keys, but
> > presently that's not possible in a simple way and, to be honest, I
> > usually just go without as the process you've described below is too
> > prone to user (human) error when dealing with live, sensitive data
> for
> > me to want to mess with it.
> >
> >
> > Ah, but it is possible... if you use views.
> >
> > I recommend you build views and query off them. Then you can control
> > the order the columns will appear.
> Which would be great if I didn't have (many) thousands of lines of code
> that already use the tables. Besides, this is no where near a 'make or
> break' thing. It's just a matter of aesthetic preference.

So do it as needed and convert your application slowly.

I just name my views as table_name_vw so all you have to do is modify your
queries to hit the _vw instead of just the table. That shouldn't take much
time to refactor.

==================================================================
Aaron Bono
Aranya Software Technologies, Inc.
http://www.aranya.com
http://codeelixir.com
==================================================================