|
Another philosophical question for you all..
I'm beginning to work with a once a week incremental data feed from an
outside source that consists of about 30 tables.
I'll end up with a set of 30 production tables and 30 staging tables.
I intend to have the production tables in a separate library from the rest
of my application (currently in 4 data libraries)
I'm trying to decide rather of not to keep the staging tables in the same
library as the production tables or in another library.
Obviously, if I keep them in the same library, I'd need need to have the
staging table named differently from the production version. Whereas if I
put the staging tables in another library I could have the same name.
I was initially leaning toward same name, different libraries. But now I'm
thinking I want different names so I can use unqualified names and depend
on the library list resolution. Primarily so I can have TEST/DEV
environments within my change management system (Aldon)
But that leaves me with deciding rather or not to have the tables in one
library or two.
Thoughts?
Charles
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.