2 ms·
I think it depends on if your table names are readable or not. If you table names are "sales" and "orders" then I would argue that makes the sql a lot more read
by pwildenhain 5y ago
I think it depends on if your table names are readable or not. If you table names are "sales" and "orders" then I would argue that makes the sql a lot more readable i.e
sales.amount
orders.due_date
vs
s.amount
ord.due_date
In the second example I have to flip back and forth between the join statement in order to know where the columns are coming from.
If you have awful table names though like qq123xc then I think aliasing would be appropriate
- cryptonector 5y agoThe moment you have the same table used more than once as a table source (in a JOIN) then this goes out the window. Moreover, there's nothing wrong with saying `SELECT ... FROM sales sales ...`.
- Orou 5y agoWholeheartedly agree with this. The problem isn't aliasing, it's lazy aliasing which is more I think what GP was referring to (e.g. emp.id instead of employee.id).