tables renaming

As we transition to the new Hyland Community, some post links may be temporarily disrupted as we finalize redirects. We apologize for the inconvenience and are working to resolve this as quickly as possible. Details.

tombaeyens

In order to better indicate which category the different tables are in, I propose following table renames:

ACT_ID_GROUP          –> ACT_ID_GROUP
ACT_ID_MEMBERSHIP     –> ACT_ID_MEMBERSHIP
ACT_ID_USER           –> ACT_ID_USER
ACT_H_PROCINST        –> ACT_HS_PROC_INST
ACT_H_ACTINST         –> ACT_HS_ACT_INST
ACT_PROPERTY          –> ACT_MG_PROPERTY
ACT_DEPLOYMENT        –> ACT_RP_DEPLOYMENT
ACT_PROCESSDEFINITION –> ACT_RP_PROC_DEF
ACT_BYTEARRAY         –> ACT_RT_BYTEARRAY
ACT_EXECUTION         –> ACT_RT_EXECUTION
ACT_JOB               –> ACT_RT_JOB
ACT_TASK              –> ACT_RT_TASK
ACT_TASKINVOLVEMENT   –> ACT_RT_TASK_IVMNT
ACT_VARIABLE          –> ACT_RT_VARIABLE‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

ACT_ID_XXX –> tables for the identity component
ACT_HS_XXX –> tables for the history component
ACT_MG_XXX –> tables for the management component  (i'm unsure about this one, but couldn't find a better name)
ACT_RP_XXX –> tables containing the static repository data
ACT_RT_XXX –> tables containing the dynamic runtime data

any objections or thoughts?

jbarrez

I agree, now is the time to get the table names consistent.

How will we cope with the alpha4->beta1 migration? None ? Or create a small DDL with the changes ?
Imo, since it is an alpha4, we should not invest time in it.