How should a DBA respond to a client's request to change the name of a database table?

How should a DBA respond to a client's request to change the name of a database table?

• A. Create a new table
• B. Rename the existing table
• C. Drop the table
• D. Modify the table structure

Answer: (B)

Renaming an existing table is the most straightforward and efficient approach when a client requests a change to a database table's name. This method preserves all the data and structure contained within the table while ensuring that references to the table are updated accordingly, such as in queries and reports. Most database management systems provide a command or function specifically designed to rename tables, which minimizes the risk of data loss or corruption and maintains the integrity of the database. Creating a new table would involve duplicating the data and potentially rewriting application logic to point to the new table, which is unnecessary when a simple rename can achieve the goal. Dropping the table would result in the loss of all data within it, which is counterproductive when preserving existing records is a priority. Modifying the table structure typically relates to changes in the columns or data types rather than the name itself, making it an irrelevant action for this specific request. Overall, renaming the existing table effectively meets the client's request while upholding data integrity and operational efficiency.

Renaming an existing table is the most straightforward and efficient approach when a client requests a change to a database table's name. This method preserves all the data and structure contained within the table while ensuring that references to the table are updated accordingly, such as in queries and reports. Most database management systems provide a command or function specifically designed to rename tables, which minimizes the risk of data loss or corruption and maintains the integrity of the database.

Creating a new table would involve duplicating the data and potentially rewriting application logic to point to the new table, which is unnecessary when a simple rename can achieve the goal. Dropping the table would result in the loss of all data within it, which is counterproductive when preserving existing records is a priority. Modifying the table structure typically relates to changes in the columns or data types rather than the name itself, making it an irrelevant action for this specific request.

Overall, renaming the existing table effectively meets the client's request while upholding data integrity and operational efficiency.