On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 06:17:21PM -0500, Dana Hudes wrote:
> From a documentation perspective, if I have a PK that I then use as a FK
> somewhere, gosh but it makes life so much clearer to use the same name.
Why? I don't buy this one.
I find it much clearer to make FKs the name of the table to which they
refer.
I also find it much simpler to just make the PK of every table be called
'id'.
But I'm also a huge believer in the principle that Primary Keys should
always be meaningless.
Tony
_______________________________________________
maypole mailing list
maypole at lists.netthink.co.uk
http://lists.netthink.co.uk/listinfo/maypole
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Feb 24 2005 - 22:25:58 GMT