howardjr wrote:Eventhough I agree that it's a good custom to think and name like this I disagree about something in his naming.
It is precisely because of this multi-instance subtlety that it is NOT common to name all three the same. It's impossible to do so, in fact, because my database sales cannot be opened by two instances both called SALES. One will have to be called SALES1 (or something similar) and the other SALES2... and immediately, your database name does not equal your instance names. Similarly, it would rather unusual to have instances SALES1 and SALES2 and yet have services SALES1 and SALES2. That would be to see service as the same thing as instance (the trap I think your description has fallen into, actually) and would negate the whole point of the service in the first place. More likely, you will have a service called SALES, comprised of instances SALES1 and SALES2 which both open a database called SALESDB... and at that point, not one of the three elements you discussed has the same name!