asked on

SQL Server naming conventions

Please review attached document, and indicate any issues you find and/or provide suggestion where required.

rSQL-Naming-Conventions-Standard.doc

ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION

Aneesh

membership

This solution is only available to members.

To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.

Start Free Trial

robertkc

ASKER

@aneeshattingalD

Reason for Incremental Number,
Is because there may be multiple columns on these objects. And at somepoint it may break your naming pattern, now your names will not follow a single pattern.

It also seems that the names may either get longer than is comfortable (and beyond server name limits at some point in time)

Based on these considerations, the alternative approach was to use incremental numbers.

Aneesh

the main advantage of putting the you can easily get the definition of the key from the name itself, if you put the numbers, then, you have to check the definition.
I agree, the name will be longer thats the disadvaantage

robertkc

ASKER

To be honest I like your naming pattern and I was using your naming convention previously but was later told not to use it. -- name too long for multiple columns etc... = bad.

robertkc

ASKER

Document Revised.

rSQLNamingConventionsStandard2.doc

robertkc

ASKER

This should be the final version, unless im missing something.
SQL-Naming-Conventions-Standard-.doc

SOLUTION

St3veMax

membership

This solution is only available to members.

To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.

Start Free Trial

robertkc

ASKER

Free points.