I agree with Kevin - if you are designing a database from scratch,
going with an "all upper or all lower case with underscores" naming
convention for database tables is the least common denominator that is
portable across databases, supported by the Modeler on import and
finally, won't scare your DBA who maybe used to her database
case-INsensitivity.
In my mind there is only one reason to support what Tomislav suggested
- compatibility with all possible existing schemas. So I am for having
a pluggable (optional) DB name quoting policy. This will be a low
priority feature to me personally, but if somebody contributes it to
us, I don't see why we shouldn't support it.
Andrus
On Apr 5, 2005, at 3:55 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
> IIRC, Cayenne will convert '_' fine. So if you name a column
> "first_name",
> cayenne, when creating the class, will create getFirstName(),
> setFirstName(). I'm unable to test it right now to verify, but I'm
> pretty
> sure I have some fields like that that Cayenne took care of nicely.
>
> --
> Kevin
>
>
> On 4/5/05 2:28 PM, "tnaki..ofthome.net" <tnakic@softhome.net> wrote:
>
>> I've found some mention of the problem in the list archive, but it
>> didn't seem related enough so here goes: the case sensitivity problem
>> again...
>> I can simply lowercase every name in the database and get it over
>> with, but:
>> a) I shouldn't have to do that
>> b) it makes switching databases harder
>> c) the generated Java code isn't nearly as nice as when using the
>> myTableName.myFirstAttribute notation.
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Apr 05 2005 - 20:06:17 EDT