9

There are several proposed tags changes lingering about here on meta. I thought I'd capture them all here, each one as a separate answer, and let people vote on them.

Awaiting Review

Completed

If you downvote a suggestion please explain why in a comment.

1
  • I'd leave sql as-is. There are a lot of questions tagged SQL on SO.
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 9:43

32 Answers 32

Reset to default
1
2
10

Remove the tag. Use and together instead.

1
  • [mysql-replication] was merged into [replication]; all the questions already had the [mysql] tag anyway
    – Jeff Atwood
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 14:07
9

Delete .

What's the point of it? Existing questions tagged with it should instead use or nothing at all.

1
9

How about the and tags being renamed to as that was the official name announced at this morning's PASS Summit keynote.

2
8

Remove . We already have .

2
  • I merged these tags
    – Jeff Atwood
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 14:06
  • 2
    Neither of these are even needed, per-se. The whole point of posting a query is to get help, and at that point you should be identifying the platform.
    – jcolebrand Mod
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 15:53
8

Delete . What's the point of that?

We already have (itself of questionable value).

0
8

Merge into .

I don't see the need for both, because while discussing one you will almost assuredly be discussing the other.

Thoughts?

3
  • 5
    I prefer locking (a concept) over locks (a thing), but yeah I don't see the need for both.
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Oct 29, 2011 at 2:45
  • 1
    The only reason I can see to use the locks tag, is if it is a very specific question over which type of lock to expect in a given scenario. These questions, in my mind, are encapsulated by the locking concept.
    – Matt M
    Commented Oct 30, 2011 at 20:46
  • Better as a synonym, again this could adversely affect searching if people aren't aware of the exact taxonomy.
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 9:58
8

Do something about .. First thought is synonym of

6
  • 1
    Synonym of database-design?
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Nov 17, 2011 at 17:00
  • agree - though it probably needs to come off some of the questions it's currently on
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Nov 17, 2011 at 17:10
  • we need to encourage some other guys to vote in here :)
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Nov 17, 2011 at 17:10
  • @Jack hope you don't mind, I edited the answer with nick's suggesiton
    – Derek Downey
    Commented Nov 17, 2011 at 17:38
  • Vote here on the synonym: dba.stackexchange.com/tags/database-design/synonyms
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Nov 17, 2011 at 18:22
  • Fairly ambiguous term. I think the appropriate strategy would be to re-tag to 'data-model' or 'database-design' where this was more meaningful. However it's still worth thinking about naive searches.
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 10:00
7

Index and indexing tags should be merged.

7

Alias to

1
  • I think I'd prefer to have it the other way around. In my experience, DBMSes tend to call them privileges, while OSes call them permissions. At present, only permissions has a tag wiki entry.
    – Colin 't Hart
    Commented Aug 8, 2014 at 14:08
6

Delete and similar tags that add platform names to generic database concepts.

Questions relating to generic database concepts should be tagged separately with the platform and the operations. So, for example, should instead be and . Contrast this to , which is about a specific tool and so merits its own tag.

6
  • this was all the result of overtagging on a single question, which I retagged: dba.stackexchange.com/questions/4755/…
    – Jeff Atwood
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 14:10
  • Delete pg-restore and similar tags that add platform names to generic database concepts. I don't know all the tools on all the platforms. If you see one come up like this, flag the question for us mods to see, and tell us in the flag (or better, in a comment on the Q) why that flag is no good.
    – jcolebrand Mod
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 16:00
  • 4
    pg-restore, rman and mysqldump are all "specific tools" AFAIK - is there something special about mysqldump that merits its own tag?
    – Jack Douglas
    Commented Sep 27, 2011 at 20:05
  • @JackDouglas - Didn't know that about pg-restore, actually. I assumed its intention was equivalent to postgresql and restore. Thus, in this case I would say pg-restore is OK as long as the question is about the specifics of getting that tool to work. (mysqldump retroactively merits its existence because there are so many questions about the specifics of getting that tool to work.)
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Sep 27, 2011 at 20:11
  • @JackDouglas - Alternately, perhaps we should delete mysqldump as well and recommend people use mysql and export together?
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Sep 27, 2011 at 20:12
  • 1
    I don't know what is most pragmatic here but I think a single tag covering backup/restore/export/import and perhaps a seperate tag covering recovery would be cleanest. The Status Quo is not so bad though?
    – Jack Douglas
    Commented Sep 28, 2011 at 11:45
6

Delete

Seems a bit too specific to be helpful?

1
  • Definitely. A tag for one SQL Server function? Nope.
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Feb 6, 2012 at 15:42
6

Remove . Any tag should refer to a product more specific than just the company that makes it.

As suggested by gbn and implemented by COTW, could be merged with generic tag.

7
  • 1
    +1 inclined to agree with this - all but two questions tagged microsoft were actually questions about sql-server
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 14:21
  • 1
    Change to merge with vendor?
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 14:42
  • @ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells added
    – JNK
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 14:42
  • Credit where credit is due - vendor was actually @gbn's idea :)
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 14:44
  • @ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells CLARIFIED!
    – JNK
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 14:44
  • You guys are like research professors. Or Wikipedia editors.
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 15:49
  • I've retagged a lot of questions with gratuitous use of Microsoft (often in combination with sql-server). The remaining questions are mostly to do with certification or where the poster mentions they've contacted Microsoft support. Maybe we should add tags certification and support-contract ?
    – Colin 't Hart
    Commented Aug 5, 2014 at 13:57
5

Rename to to distinguish it from Windows Azure and make it consistent with the tags for Microsoft's other products.

5
  • agreed, and this is done
    – Jeff Atwood
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 14:09
  • @Jeff - I would delete azure as well so others don't use it anymore. Or was it your intention to leave it there for the OS? (In which case I would make it windows-azure.)
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 15:53
  • @JeffAtwood ... why? Was there really a strong sense of people coming to DBA and mistaking azure as being about something other than data storage?
    – jcolebrand Mod
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 15:53
  • @Nick those fall off nightly
    – jcolebrand Mod
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 15:53
  • @jcolebrand - Okie doke.
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 15:55
5

Delete . What purpose does it serve?

If the question is about selecting a database platform then it should be tagged with .

1
5

Rename to and blacklist forcing explicit choice between and

2
  • Again, tags can get used in searches, so not having a 'tuning' tag could be counter-intuitive if you weren't familiar with the taxonomy in use.
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 9:52
  • don't forget index-tuning too
    – JNK
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 14:20
5

Delete . Not worthy of it's own tag. It was created solely for this question.

4

Delete .

We already have . Two of the three questions tagged are already tagged , and the third can easily be retagged as just .

7
  • +1 sounds right to me - xml is not big enough to justify more than one tag here
    – Jack Douglas
    Commented Oct 4, 2011 at 19:36
  • @JackDouglas - Well, as a mod you can now execute on these requests. :) Is there something the mods are specifically looking for before implementing a requested tag change?
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Oct 30, 2011 at 20:59
  • Thanks Nick, this one is now done (and xmltype is now a synonym for xml) - are there any other up-voted suggestions that haven't been actioned?
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Oct 30, 2011 at 22:52
  • @JackDouglas - Status for each proposal is in the original question.
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Oct 30, 2011 at 23:02
  • so it is! I'll have a look at the others tomorrow :)
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Oct 30, 2011 at 23:09
  • but please nudge me if it looks like I've forgotten...
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Oct 30, 2011 at 23:26
  • Again, re-tag where inappropriate, but xmltype is IIRC an actual data type in Oracle and therefore potentially meaningful in context.
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 9:57
4

Rename to and blacklist to prevent abuse

6
  • 1
    There are a lot of questions on SO tagged 'SQL'. I think it might be confusing to ban the tag, particularly if migrating questions from there. However, I think anything referring specifically to SQL Server should get re-tagged.
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 9:45
  • Also SQL-language is redundant - Structured Query Language Language?
    – JNK
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 14:24
  • 1
    @JNK the other option is keep sql which means retagging numerous questions from those who think SQL Server is called SQL - which do you prefer? :-)
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 15:13
  • I think retagging from SQL to SQL Server makes sense, though. They will need to be ANYWAYS since we pretty much always want a RDBMS tag on there when possible, right?
    – JNK
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 15:14
  • @JNK I think you were right to say rdbms is too general if it is used for anything other than Qs like: "How does an RDBMS keep data consistent when there are multiple users?"
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 15:21
  • @JackDouglas - COTW showed some good use cases in chat so I removed the suggestion. There are some valid uses about generic solutions.
    – JNK
    Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 15:24
4

Make a synonym of . The former was created for this question. The latter is older and is the correct term for the service.

4

Migrate to . I created the tag with the intention of making a synonym, but don't have the required score.

Since Percona Server is the Percona's (the company) database offering, I think the -server bit is of higher importance.

6
  • 1
    By that logic wouldn't we need to rename oracle too?
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Feb 17, 2012 at 7:41
  • 1
    What do people actually call it when they refer to it elsewhere?
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Feb 17, 2012 at 7:41
  • @JackDouglas "By that logic wouldn't we need to rename oracle too" I think Oracle is fine, as they don't refer to their product as 'Oracle Server' (Maybe 'Oracle Database', but that's redundant). Percona (the company) calls their product 'Percona Server'. I think the separation of product and company is important here. What if the 'SQL Server' tags were just 'SQL'!
    – Derek Downey
    Commented Feb 17, 2012 at 14:16
  • SQL Server can't be SQL because of confusion with the SQL language - but we'll never need a percona tag for the company will we? Unless there is a case of possible confusion, I favour brevity
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Feb 17, 2012 at 14:42
  • @JackDouglas The problem is Percona offers many things, such as percona-toolkit. Personally, I favor removing any confusion by explicitly separating their offerings to how they identify the products.
    – Derek Downey
    Commented Feb 17, 2012 at 14:45
  • 1
    we have mysql and mysql-workbench?
    – Jack Douglas Mod
    Commented Feb 17, 2012 at 15:18
4

transaction-logs as a synonym for logs or vice-versa. My preference would be for transaction-logs to be the canonical entry but logs has a lot more questions on the tag.

4

We have and . Make one a synonym of the other.

4

Remove and/or merge into

4

Convert to

1

Merge ssis and ssis2008 and just use ssis. For version specific features, the sql version tag can be included.

1
  • What if some user has some problem using eg ssis2012 in combination with sql-server-2008?
    – Colin 't Hart
    Commented Aug 5, 2014 at 13:59
0

Please make a synonym of .

1
  • 2
    No, they're separate things. SQLCMD-MODE can refer to SSMS running SQLCMD scripts, but SQLCMD itself is a separate application.
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 9:44
-3

Though they technically mean different things, and should be made synonyms of one common tag (or maybe one be the synonym of the other).

Propose how exactly this should change in the comments to this answer.

5
  • 1
    there are only 2 and 3 questions, respectively; this can probably stay as-is for a bit longer while we figure out the distinction
    – Jeff Atwood
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 14:14
  • 6
    Restore and Recover do not mean the same things. Recover means "omg that shit is gone" and restore means "i need the version from yesterday"
    – jcolebrand Mod
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 15:57
  • @jcolebrand - Right, but I wonder if each merits its own tag, as opposed to a more generic tag that covers both scenarios.
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 16:00
  • 1
    @Nick they each deserve their own tag, as there is no "common" ground for the two. One is something we should all be prepared to do daily, the other is disaster recovery.
    – jcolebrand Mod
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 16:01
  • 1
    @jcolebrand - OK, I'm with you on this. I'll edit the wikis for those two tags to stress the difference.
    – Nick Chammas
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 16:10
-4

Delete .

We already have and . In most cases can simply and aptly be replaced by .

4
  • the [data] tag is far too generic to exist and I have destroyed it. I then renamed [data-migration] to simply [migration]
    – Jeff Atwood
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 14:12
  • 4
    @JeffAtwood the data tag I agree with, however data-migration and migration can be two different things here. It's entirely possible that a person has questions about migrating an instance of an cloud server, for instance. Let's not be too haphazard with the renames. I told Nick to post it on meta to get discussion from the site's power users.
    – jcolebrand Mod
    Commented Sep 18, 2011 at 15:58
  • @JeffAtwood - agree with jcolebrand. 'Data Migration' is a widely used term. Migration can get used in other contexts, such as shifting VMs around different hosts.
    – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 9:54
  • Or migration from Oracle to SQL Server or vice versa. I agree that migration and data migration are not synonyms.
    – Aaron Bertrand Staff
    Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 0:08
1
2

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .