[Pdx-pm] (OT) SQL style question

[Kevin Long]

I had the luxury of creating a system for a large but known set of
databases and tables. Additionally addition of new databases and tables
that users were not interested in reporting on were not needed.

You must admit that _CONTAINS_ is an unlikely name-part for a table =-)

Kevin Ernest Long | Creator of Cool
Office:  +1 503 224 6010 x 248 |  Fax:   +1 503 224 1581  |  Home Office
& Mobile:  +1 503 888 6879

-----Original Message-----
From: David Wheeler [mailto:david at kineticode.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:34 PM
To: Kevin Long
Cc: pdx-pm-list at pm.org
Subject: Re: [Pdx-pm] (OT) SQL style question

On Jan 13, 2005, at 4:12 PM, Kevin Long wrote:

> I have use _DOT_ in the past. I would also consider other human 
> readable
> alternatives like _CONTAINS_ which conveys more meaning and avoids the
> difficulty of seeing a difference between A_VERY_LONG__THING and
> A_VERY_LONG_THING

What if you have a column named "contains"?

Recall that SQL entity names are case-insensitive unless you use 
quotation marks. And if you're going to use quotation marks, you might 
as well use a punctuation character to do the work (. or - or * or or + 
or something--or even -> :-)).

Regards,

David
  

The information contained in this email message may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this email message in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message and any attachments.