每当我设计数据库时,我总是想知道是否有一种最好的方法来命名数据库中的项目。我经常问自己以下问题:

表名应该是复数吗? 列名应该是单数吗? 我应该为表或列添加前缀吗? 我应该在命名项目时使用大小写吗?

是否有推荐的指导原则来命名数据库中的项?


当前回答

这里有一个链接,提供了一些选择。我正在寻找一个简单的规范,我可以遵循,而不是依赖于一个部分定义的规范。

http://justinsomnia.org/writings/naming_conventions.html

其他回答

我也支持ISO/IEC 11179风格的命名约定,指出它们是指导方针而不是规定。

参见维基百科上的数据元素名称:

表是实体的集合,并遵循集合命名准则。理想情况下,使用一个集合名称。、人员。复数形式也是正确的:Employees。不正确的名称包括:Employee、tblEmployee和EmployeeTable。”

与往常一样,规则也有例外,例如,一个总是只有一行的表可能用一个奇异的名字更好,例如配置表。一致性是最重要的:检查你的购物是否有惯例,如果有,就遵守它;如果你不喜欢它,那就做一个商业案例来改变它,而不是做一个独行侠。

这里的回答有点晚,但简而言之:

复数表名:我的偏好是复数 单个列名:是的 前缀表或列:

表:*通常*没有前缀是最好的。 列:没有。

在命名项时使用任何大小写:表和列都使用PascalCase。

细化:

(1)你必须做什么。很少有事情是你每次都必须以某种方式去做的,但还是有一些。

Name your primary keys using "[singularOfTableName]ID" format. That is, whether your table name is Customer or Customers, the primary key should be CustomerID. Further, foreign keys must be named consistently in different tables. It should be legal to beat up someone who does not do this. I would submit that while defined foreign key constraints are often important, consistent foreign key naming is always important You database must have internal conventions. Even though in later sections you'll see me being very flexible, within a database naming must be very consistent . Whether your table for customers is called Customers or Customer is less important than that you do it the same way throughout the same database. And you can flip a coin to determine how to use underscores, but then you must keep using them the same way. If you don't do this, you are a bad person who should have low self-esteem.

你可能应该做的事。

Fields representing the same kind of data on different tables should be named the same. Don't have Zip on one table and ZipCode on another. To separate words in your table or column names, use PascalCasing. Using camelCasing would not be intrinsically problematic, but that's not the convention and it would look funny. I'll address underscores in a moment. (You may not use ALLCAPS as in the olden days. OBNOXIOUSTABLE.ANNOYING_COLUMN was okay in DB2 20 years ago, but not now.) Don't artifically shorten or abbreviate words. It is better for a name to be long and clear than short and confusing. Ultra-short names is a holdover from darker, more savage times. Cus_AddRef. What on earth is that? Custodial Addressee Reference? Customer Additional Refund? Custom Address Referral?

(3)你应该考虑什么。

I really think you should have plural names for tables; some think singular. Read the arguments elsewhere. Column names should be singular however. Even if you use plural table names, tables that represent combinations of other tables might be in the singular. For example, if you have a Promotions and an Items table, a table representing an item being a part of a promotion could be Promotions_Items, but it could also legitimately be Promotion_Items I think (reflecting the one-to-many relationship). Use underscores consistently and for a particular purpose. Just general tables names should be clear enough with PascalCasing; you don't need underscores to separate words. Save underscores either (a) to indicate an associative table or (b) for prefixing, which I'll address in the next bullet. Prefixing is neither good or bad. It usually is not best. In your first db or two, I would not suggest using prefixes for general thematic grouping of tables. Tables end up not fitting your categories easily, and it can actually make it harder to find tables. With experience, you can plan and apply a prefixing scheme that does more good than harm. I worked in a db once where data tables began with tbl, config tables with ctbl, views with vew, proc's sp, and udf's fn, and a few others; it was meticulously, consistently applied so it worked out okay. The only time you NEED prefixes is when you have really separate solutions that for some reason reside in the same db; prefixing them can be very helpful in grouping the tables. Prefixing is also okay for special situations, like for temporary tables that you want to stand out. Very seldom (if ever) would you want to prefix columns.

命名约定允许开发团队在项目的核心设计可发现性和可维护性。

一个好的命名约定需要时间来发展,但一旦它到位,它就可以让团队使用一种共同的语言向前发展。好的命名约定会随着项目的发展而有机地发展。好的命名约定可以很容易地处理软件生命周期中最长和最重要的阶段(生产中的服务管理)中的变化。

以下是我的回答:

是的,当表名指的是一组交易、证券或交易对手时,表名应该是复数。 是的。 是的。SQL表前缀为tb_,视图前缀为vw_,存储过程前缀为usp_,触发器前缀为tg_,后面加数据库名。 列名应以小写字母用下划线分隔。

命名很难,但在每个组织中都有人可以命名事物,在每个软件团队中都应该有人负责命名标准,并确保像sec_id、sec_value和security_id这样的命名问题在融入项目之前尽早得到解决。

那么,一个好的命名规范和标准的基本原则是什么呢

使用你客户的语言 解域 是描述性的 是一致的 消除歧义,反思和重构 不要使用缩写,除非它们 每个人都清楚 不要使用SQL保留关键字作为 列名

在我看来:

表名应该是复数形式。 列名应该是单数。 不。 对于表名和列名,可以选择CamelCase(我的首选)或underscore_separated。

然而,就像上面提到的,任何约定都比没有约定好。无论您选择如何做,都要记录它,以便将来的修改遵循相同的约定。

我的观点是:

1)不,表名应该是单数。

虽然对于简单的选择(select * from Orders)似乎有意义,但对于OO等效(Orders x = new Orders)则没有意义。

数据库中的表实际上是该实体的集合,当你使用set-logic时,它更有意义:

select Orders.*
from Orders inner join Products
    on Orders.Key = Products.Key

最后一行,连接的实际逻辑,看起来与复数表名混淆。

我不确定是否总是使用别名(如Matt建议的那样)可以消除这种情况。

2)它们应该是单数,因为它们只拥有一种属性

3)如果列名有歧义(如上所述,它们都有一个名为[Key]的列),表名(或其别名)永远不能很好地区分它们。您希望查询能够快速键入,并且简单-前缀会增加不必要的复杂性。

4)无论你想要什么,我都推荐CapitalCase

我不认为有任何一套绝对的指导方针。

只要你在应用程序或数据库中选择的是一致的,我不认为这真的很重要。