| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Prepping to break every past release... |
| Date: | 2009-03-04 21:03:36 |
| Message-ID: | 1236200616.18420.53.camel@jd-laptop.pragmaticzealot.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 15:50 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > It seems to me that the best method would be to follow the
> > information_schema naming conventions as information_schema is standard
> > compliant (right?).
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
>
>
> What would be the benefit? Apart from satisfying a passion for consistency?
It would lower the cost (intellectually as well as dollars) of
development and administration for every single user of the database.
I can't count how many times I accidentally type tablename versus
table_name or worse relname, etc...
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake(at)jabber(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2009-03-04 21:09:03 | Re: Prepping to break every past release... |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2009-03-04 21:01:53 | Re: Prepping to break every past release... |