I'd go the different libraries route, same table names. Just change your library list order and you should be done.
Put test library before the production library or vice versa depending on what library you want to use. Or better yet just leave out the test or production library from your list depending on what library you want to use.
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Wilt [mailto:charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 3:48 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Philosophical question - Staging tables, name and location
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.
midrange.com
