Re: Naming conventions for lots of stored procedures

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Justin Graf <justin(at)magwerks(dot)com> wrote:

> look into schemas.
>
> this allow group table and procedure logically and can limit access
> based on schemas.
>
> what i did is group procedures, views, and tables into schemas  to keep
> them logically grouped.
> in one project there is 300 tables, and 1200 procedures
> wip  (work in process)
> sales
> AR
> AP
> GL
> public

There are two major limitations here of schemas:

1) They can't be nested leading again to possible namespace ambiguity.
2) there are a number of requests to try to get the application to
install into an arbitrary, nonpublic schema.

If schemas could be nested this would solve both of these problems.

However, if the above is anywhere near a complete list of schemas for
1200 procedures, you must also have some strong naming conventions to
prevent collisions. I would be interested in what they are.

Best wishes,
Chris Travers