January 7, 2008 at 2:04 pm
We all have our own naming conventions that make sense to us or have been implemented by others before us. And when it comes to naming stored procedures many SQL Server developers know that it is not wise to prefix stored procedures with "sp_".
When I recently looked at one of our production databases I noticed a user table that was prefixed with "sys". Does anyone know if there is a downside to naming user tables with the prefix "sys"?
Thank you in advance.
January 7, 2008 at 3:19 pm
You mean besides the utter confusion it would create...:D
January 7, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Sounds like a good way to hide something... 😎
January 7, 2008 at 3:34 pm
create table
(
[COLUMN] int not null
constraint [PRIMARY_KEY] primary key ([COLUMN])
)
January 7, 2008 at 11:19 pm
If you really want to drive a DBA insane...
CREATE TABLE [[dbo.[[[.[,] (
[.[,[,] INT,
[Max([.[,[,)] VARCHAR(10)
)
GO
SELECT [.[,[,], [Max([.[,[,)] FROM dbo.[[dbo.[[[.[,]
Yes, it's valid.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
January 8, 2008 at 9:14 am
So basically, it just should not be done for control, organization, and sanity sake within the structured environment that we so like to construct for ourselves, but does not have a downside performance hit or otherwise cause confusion for SQL Server's query engine.
January 8, 2008 at 10:36 am
As far as I know and the tests done with the profiler, it shouldnt e an issue. Except that it could drive you nuts...;)
-Roy
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply