Are Naming Conventions Still Relevant?
I recall a discussion Steve introduced a couple years ago about naming conventions. In it we were discussing the value of how things were named that provided enterprise services. The discussion was targeted primarily at SQL Server. There was a lot of feedback with good ideas and good reasons behind them. Others simply used favorite themes, while others used a numerical sequence alongside the primary role of the service.
I’m wondering how relevant a name continues to be in our world of Big Data, Cloud Services, and distributed devices. In many environments we reference the service by IP address or URL as often as not. In that kind of scenario, does it matter what name is given to a machine? Are there services you find useful to have named?
What are your thoughts? Do you have naming conventions you still find useful today? What are the situations you find names to be helpful? Are there techniques for naming providing insight or ease of management? If you were asked by an Accidental DBA, "What should I used for a naming convention", what would your response be?
if you have something you’d like to share then send your response to btaylor@sswug.org.
Cheers,
Ben
$$SWYNK$$
Featured Article(s)
SQL Server 2012 AlwaysOn Availability Groups
One of the key new features of SQL Server 2012 in terms of availability is new functionality surrounding the "Availability Groups" option set. This is a meaningful, important way to keep your applications going without the need to do significant coding to support server changes in the case of a server failure. This article takes a look at this functionality and explains where it fits in for your HA infrastructure.
Featured White Paper(s)
All-At-Once Operations
Written by Itzik Ben-Gan with SolidQ
SQL supports a concept called all-at-onc… (read more)