Mysql Naming Convention

[Jonathan Ellis]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:38:59 -0600, "C. Ed Felt" <ed at thefelts.net> said:
>    In my upper level Computer Science Database Theory course we used two
>    text books: big fat, ugly ones.  Both used singular names for table
>    names.  It appears that the reasoning was because the table name
>    itself really represents each singular "entity" and there are just
>    multiple rows of them.

Wow, that is really bizarre logic.

Would you name an array "employee" because it is a single reference? 
No;
that would be confusing: containers should be pluralized.
Similarly, a table contains multiple rows of a certain type.

All the code that I've seen that has been written by people who know
what they are doing pluralizes table names.  Even Fabian Pascal and
Joe Celko, who barely agree on anything else, agree on this much.

Worth checking out:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0120887975/sr=8-1/qid=1145414733

But I guess in the grand scheme of things, if singular table names is
your worst faux pas you're in pretty good shape. :)

-Jonathan
-- 
C++ is history repeated as tragedy. Java is history repeated as farce.  --Scott McKay