主键/外键命名约定 [英] Primary key/foreign Key naming convention
问题描述
在我们的开发团队中，我们对小键盘和外键的命名约定进行了激烈的辩论。我们组中基本上有两个思路：
In our dev group we have a raging debate regarding the naming convention for Primary and Foreign Keys. There's basically two schools of thought in our group:
1：
Primary Table (Employee)
Primary Key is called ID
Foreign table (Event)
Foreign key is called EmployeeID
或
2：
Primary Table (Employee)
Primary Key is called EmployeeID
Foreign table (Event)
Foreign key is called EmployeeID
我不想在任何列中复制表的名称（所以我更喜欢上面的选项1）。在概念上，它与其他语言中的许多推荐做法是一致的，您不会在其属性名称中使用对象的名称。我认为命名外键 EmployeeID （或 Employee_ID 可能会更好）告诉读者，它是<$ Employee 表中的c $ c> ID 列。
I prefer not to duplicate the name of the table in any of the columns (So I prefer option 1 above). Conceptually, it is consistent with a lot of the recommended practices in other languages, where you don't use the name of the object in its property names. I think that naming the foreign key EmployeeID (or Employee_ID might be better) tells the reader that it is the ID column of the Employee Table.
其他一些人喜欢选项2，其中您将主键命名为表名，以便列名在整个数据库中相同。我看到这一点，但是现在你不能在视觉上区分主键和外键。
Some others prefer option 2 where you name the primary key prefixed with the table name so that the column name is the same throughout the database. I see that point, but you now can not visually distinguish a primary key from a foreign key.
此外，我认为在列名中具有表名称是多余的，因为如果将表视为实体和列作为属性或属性的属性该实体，您将其视为员工的 Employee 的ID属性，而不是员工的 EmployeeID 属性。我不会问我的同事他的 PersonAge 或 PersonGender 是。我问他他的年龄是什么。
Also, I think it's redundant to have the table name in the column name, because if you think of the table as an entity and a column as a property or attribute of that entity, you think of it as the ID attribute of the Employee, not the EmployeeID attribute of an employee. I don't go an ask my coworker what his PersonAge or PersonGender is. I ask him what his Age is.
所以就像我说的，这是一场激烈的辩论，我们继续下去。我有兴趣得到一些新的观点。
So like I said, it's a raging debate and we go on and on and on about it. I'm interested to get some new perspectives.
推荐答案
没关系。我从来没有遇到过选择1和选择2之间有真正差异的系统。
It doesn't really matter. I've never run into a system where there is a real difference between choice 1 and choice 2.
Jeff Atwood在这个话题上有一篇很棒的文章。基本上人们争论最激烈地争论那些不能被证明是错误的话题。或者从不同的角度来看，那些只能通过基于最后一个人的观点的阻止风格耐力获得的话题。
Jeff Atwood had a great article a while back on this topic. Basically people debate and argue the most furiously those topics which they cannot be proven wrong on. Or from a different angle, those topics which can only be won through filibuster style endurance based last-man-standing arguments.
选择一个，并告诉他们专注于实际上会影响你的代码。
Pick one and tell them to focus on issues that actually impact your code.
编辑：如果你想玩得开心，请给他们详细说明为什么他们的方法对于递归表引用是优越的。
If you want to have fun, have them specify at length why their method is superior for recursive table references.
这篇关于主键/外键命名约定的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
