On 10-9-2019 10:16, liviuslivius wrote:
Hi
i work a little on https://github.com/FirebirdSQL/firebird/pull/223.
I know this is not top 1 priority for the team, but i need some
decisions from the team about formatting
1. Style of the name of xml nodes
"JoinType" like MSSQL
"Join-Type" like Postgress
"Join_Type"
other proposition..
My preference would go to JoinType, but that is largely a personal
preference.
2. Plan xml formatting with attributes or without
a) with attributes
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<SelectExpression xmlns="http://www.firebirdsql.org";>
I'd suggest a more specific namespace, like
https://www.firebirdsql.org/2019/ExecutionPlan (eg see
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4623221/good-or-common-naming-conventions-for-xml-namespace-uris
). That avoids ambiguity when we ever introduce other XML that requires
a namespace.
<Node Operation="Union">
<Node Operation="Nested Loop Join" JoinType="Inner">
<Node Operation="Full Scan">
<Table alias=" < xml >">RDB$DATABASE</Table>
</Node>
<Node Operation="Filter">
<Table Alias="R" Access="By ID">RDB$RELATIONS</Table>
You example shows two different naming styles for attributes PascalCase
(Alias) and camelCase (alias). In my experience (but that might be a
result of working in the Java world), using camelCase for attributes is
more common.
[..]
</SelectExpression>
b) without attributes at all
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<SelectExpression xmlns="http://www.firebirdsql.org";>
<Node>
<Operation>Union</Operation>
<Node>
<Operation>Nested Loop Join</Operation>
<JoinType>Inner</JoinType>
<Node>
<Operation>Full Scan</Operation>
<Alias> < xml ></Alias>
<Table>RDB$DATABASE</Table>
</Node>
[..]
</Node>
</SelectExpression>
I have a small preference for the variant without attributes, on the
other hand the format with attributes is slightly more compact.
Mark
--
Mark Rotteveel
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
