Timeline for Is adding the ‘tbl’ prefix to table names really a problem?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 11, 2019 at 4:55 | history | edited | sampathsris | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 474 characters in body
|
| Nov 14, 2017 at 8:52 | history | edited | sampathsris | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| Oct 26, 2017 at 5:06 | history | edited | sampathsris | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 149 characters in body
|
| Oct 26, 2017 at 4:29 | history | edited | sampathsris | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 128 characters in body
|
| Nov 9, 2016 at 11:54 | comment | added | grahamj42 | I am implementing this ERP product, and the naming convention is very useful to reinforce the pattern "Consult a view, update with an API" and avoids the temptation to update a table directly without carefully considering the business logic. | |
| Nov 8, 2016 at 12:04 | history | edited | Paul White♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed missing word; removed meta content
|
| Nov 8, 2016 at 5:28 | history | edited | sampathsris | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 15 characters in body
|
| Nov 8, 2016 at 5:20 | history | answered | sampathsris | CC BY-SA 3.0 |