Skip to main content

Community

Provide users with more flexibility in the destination schema names

Answered

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Comments

3 comments

  • Official comment
    Fraser User

    Hi Gaëtan - we have a strong philosophy of "one simple default choice" with minimal configuration.  Our strategy for avoiding schema & table name collisions in the data warehouse is to require the unique prefix. In practice, this simple rule has been incredibly effective - I can't recall a customer ever having a naming collision.

    Our recommendation is a "Enterprise Data Warehouse" architecture, with Fivetran delivering the Raw Schemas, and your users being exposed a transformed set of Schemas. In your case, that transformation is a simple set of VIEWs that organize the tables into the schema name you want.

    Hi Fraser,

    Thanks for your reply. I understand your reasoning.  The "EDWH" with (materialized) views are what I ended-up implementing.

    Regards

    I see the logic above, but 100% disagree with not letting the customer do what they want. I am willing to risk collision at my own peril!!!!! 

    Please consider reopening.