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.

share
    
I'd leave sql as-is. There are a lot of questions tagged SQL on SO. – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells Dec 9 '11 at 9:43

32 Answers 32

Remove the tag. Use and together instead.

share
    
[mysql-replication] was merged into [replication]; all the questions already had the [mysql] tag anyway – Jeff Atwood Sep 18 '11 at 14:07

Delete .

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

share
    
seems like columns is now a synonym of database-design – Derek Downey Nov 17 '11 at 17:27

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

share
3  
Sweet. I think denali should be a synonym, sql-server-2011 renamed. – Nick Chammas Oct 12 '11 at 19:08
    
Agreed. Made the same suggestion on this meta SO thread: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/98692/… – Aaron Bertrand Oct 12 '11 at 19:10

Remove . We already have .

share
    
I merged these tags – Jeff Atwood Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 18 '11 at 15:53

Delete . What's the point of that?

We already have (itself of questionable value).

share

Merge into .

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

Thoughts?

share
5  
I prefer locking (a concept) over locks (a thing), but yeah I don't see the need for both. – Nick Chammas Oct 29 '11 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 Oct 30 '11 at 20:46
    
Better as a synonym, again this could adversely affect searching if people aren't aware of the exact taxonomy. – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells Dec 9 '11 at 9:58

Do something about .. First thought is synonym of

share
1  
Synonym of database-design? – Nick Chammas Nov 17 '11 at 17:00
    
agree - though it probably needs to come off some of the questions it's currently on – Jack Douglas Nov 17 '11 at 17:10
    
we need to encourage some other guys to vote in here :) – Jack Douglas Nov 17 '11 at 17:10
    
@Jack hope you don't mind, I edited the answer with nick's suggesiton – Derek Downey Nov 17 '11 at 17:38
    
Vote here on the synonym: dba.stackexchange.com/tags/database-design/synonyms – Nick Chammas Nov 17 '11 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 Dec 9 '11 at 10:00

Index and indexing tags should be merged.

share

Alias to

share
    
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 Aug 8 '14 at 14:08

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.

share
    
this was all the result of overtagging on a single question, which I retagged: dba.stackexchange.com/questions/4755/… – Jeff Atwood Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 27 '11 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 Sep 27 '11 at 20:11
    
@JackDouglas - Alternately, perhaps we should delete mysqldump as well and recommend people use mysql and export together? – Nick Chammas Sep 27 '11 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 Sep 28 '11 at 11:45

Delete

Seems a bit too specific to be helpful?

share
    
Definitely. A tag for one SQL Server function? Nope. – Nick Chammas Feb 6 '12 at 15:42

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.

share
1  
+1 inclined to agree with this - all but two questions tagged microsoft were actually questions about sql-server – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells Feb 21 '12 at 14:21
1  
Change to merge with vendor? – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells Feb 21 '12 at 14:42
    
@ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells added – JNK Feb 21 '12 at 14:42
    
Credit where credit is due - vendor was actually @gbn's idea :) – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells Feb 21 '12 at 14:44
    
@ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells CLARIFIED! – JNK Feb 21 '12 at 14:44
    
You guys are like research professors. Or Wikipedia editors. – Nick Chammas Feb 21 '12 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 Aug 5 '14 at 13:57

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

share
    
agreed, and this is done – Jeff Atwood Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 18 '11 at 15:53
    
@Nick those fall off nightly – jcolebrand Sep 18 '11 at 15:53
    
@jcolebrand - Okie doke. – Nick Chammas Sep 18 '11 at 15:55

Delete . What purpose does it serve?

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

share
    
This is done. – Nick Chammas Sep 26 '11 at 20:47

Rename to and blacklist forcing explicit choice between and

share
    
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 Dec 9 '11 at 9:52
    
don't forget index-tuning too – JNK Feb 21 '12 at 14:20

Rename to and blacklist to prevent abuse

share
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 Dec 9 '11 at 9:45
    
Also SQL-language is redundant - Structured Query Language Language? – JNK Feb 21 '12 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 Feb 21 '12 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 Feb 21 '12 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 Feb 21 '12 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 Feb 21 '12 at 15:24

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

share

Delete .

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

share
    
+1 sounds right to me - xml is not big enough to justify more than one tag here – Jack Douglas Oct 4 '11 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 Oct 30 '11 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 Oct 30 '11 at 22:52
    
@JackDouglas - Status for each proposal is in the original question. – Nick Chammas Oct 30 '11 at 23:02
    
so it is! I'll have a look at the others tomorrow :) – Jack Douglas Oct 30 '11 at 23:09
    
but please nudge me if it looks like I've forgotten... – Jack Douglas Oct 30 '11 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 Dec 9 '11 at 9:57

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

share

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.

share
1  
By that logic wouldn't we need to rename oracle too? – Jack Douglas Feb 17 '12 at 7:41
1  
What do people actually call it when they refer to it elsewhere? – Jack Douglas Feb 17 '12 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 Feb 17 '12 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 Feb 17 '12 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 Feb 17 '12 at 14:45
1  
we have mysql and mysql-workbench? – Jack Douglas Feb 17 '12 at 15:18

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.

share

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

share

Remove and/or merge into

share

Convert to

share

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

share
    
What if some user has some problem using eg ssis2012 in combination with sql-server-2008? – Colin 't Hart Aug 5 '14 at 13:59

Please make a synonym of .

share
2  
No, they're separate things. SQLCMD-MODE can refer to SSMS running SQLCMD scripts, but SQLCMD itself is a separate application. – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells Dec 9 '11 at 9:44

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.

share
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 Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 18 '11 at 16:10

Delete .

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

share
    
the [data] tag is far too generic to exist and I have destroyed it. I then renamed [data-migration] to simply [migration] – Jeff Atwood Sep 18 '11 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 Sep 18 '11 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 Dec 9 '11 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 Feb 19 '12 at 0:08

You must log in to answer this question.

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