> am using the "tbl" prefix for all my tables and I use "qry_" for all my
> tables as I find I get confused switching back btw the query and table
pane
Tables shouldn't need a prefix. If it looks like a table, smells like a
table, quacks like a table... it's probably a table. Or something that acts
just like one, such as a view in SQL Server. Feel free to use q_ prefix for
queries, but isn't that enough to differentiate? Why also a tbl prefix on
tables? I can pick out the tables in both of these lists:
qryA
qryB
tblA
tblB
A
B
qryA
qryB
> Also, you mentioned a while ago PITA types for field names. I have been
> using myID for primary keys;
What is an ID? And what the heck does "my" have to do with anything? How
about naming the entity for what it represents, e.g. OrderID, CustomerID? I
have no idea what myID would contain... I might expect this table to contain
one row, with a single column containing the creator's Social Security
Number???
> and my_ID for foreign keys
I fail to see how an underscore is, in any fashion, an intuitive way to
denote or identify a foreign key. If you really, really, really, need to
know that a column is a foreign key, a prefix FK_ makes much more sense than
comparing myID and my_ID. This information is available in the metadata of
the database, and should not be complicating the schema itself.
You should investigate NCITS L8 Metadata Standards Committee naming
conventions, Celko summed it up here:
http://tinyurl.com/k5k9
> As a matter of interest which is your preferred method for Access in this
situation.
Not using Access. You should consider MSDE.
> Also, what is the signifcance of "129".....
Tells the connection object the kind of statement you're sending, and that
you don't expect any records back (
adExecuteNoRecords + adCmdText). Both of these things make the object's job
easier and improve efficiency. For other ideas, see
http://www.aspfaq.com/2424#db