Naming Conventions for SQL 2005

Question

Naming Conventions for SQL 2005

J Bagwell

SSC-Addicted

Points: 404
More actions
August 1, 2005 at 2:17 pm

#165563

I know that there is not a consensus on naming conventions for SQL Server 2000 and earlier, but are there any specific naming conventions for SQL Server 2005? Are there any of the old 'rules' that run into trouble in 2005?
J. Bagwell
UVA Health System
August 4, 2005 at 8:00 am

This was removed by the editor as SPAM

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Chris Hedgate One Orange Chip Points: 25041 More actions · Answer 1

Microsoft are not trying to force any naming convention on table or object names, if that is what you are asking. The old rules of not using sp_ as the prefix for procedure names and similar rules still apply. One thing that might affect a little is that SQL Server 2005 supports schemas correctly. Therefore the old saying that all objects should always be owned by dbo is not quite as true anymore, even though there is nothing wrong with having them owned by the dbo schema in 2005.

--
Chris Hedgate http://www.hedgate.net/
Contributor to the Best of SQL Server Central volumes
Articles: http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/chedgate/

J Bagwell SSC-Addicted Points: 404 More actions · Answer 2

Chris,

Thanks. That's exactly the kind of information I was looking for.

J. Bagwell

UVA Health System