Group items in table/routine tree

Hi all!
First of all, sorry for my english, it maybe bad sometimes... :)
Sometimes I have to work with larger projects (40-120+ tables). In this case better to see contacting items together (table, trigger, procedures and functions) for me. If Heidi can groupping items in tree it can be a huge help in my work. The groupping should check "_" character. ie:

[+] mytable
|_ mytable_trigger1 
|_ mytable_trigger2
|_ mytable_function
|_ mytable_procedure
[+] mytable2
[-] otherroutines

and so on.

At triggers the contacting table can be read from trigger definition, the special name conventions ("table_routine") are required in routine names only in this way.

The most ideal group example (maybe only for me? :D)

[+] mytable
|_ mytable_trigger1 
|_ mytable_trigger2
|_ mytable_function
|_ mytable_procedure
|_[+]mytable_contactingtable
|_ [mytable_contactingtable_trigger1]
|_ [mytable_contactingtable_trigger2]
|_ [mytable_contactingtable_routine]
[+] mytable2
[-] otherroutines

By this way above I can see 1 software module's tables as a tree entry. It can be a real huge help!

Thanks for reading :)
Viktor

Thanks for ideas. But I'm afraid there already is a discussion going on in issue #1031 talking about grouping of tables, views, triggers, procedures, functions and events. I think your idea sounds nice from a certain point of view but it's too case specific to get most users convinced of. It's difficult enough to get some consense in the above mentioned issue.

It will be a real help for me too!

Thanks for answering. I think you are right, it really can be case specific, but one thing is not: triggers always contacting to a specific table. If Heidi do this way it can help a bit.

There is one other way that's not case specific, and may solve problems in most cases.

If I can make "folders" in table/routine tree, and move items as I need should be great. Everybody who needs "foldering" can use it any way.

Developers,please consider this proposal. :)

Thank you :)

I think, it is very good idea to let user group tables and other db objects as he needs.

Grouping items by type seems to be good idea, but when working with databases that have 120+ tables it is hardly useful.

Grouping tables by prefixes also seems to be ok (in way that PhpMyAdmin groups databases with the same prefix).

Guys, please let's keep discussion in issue #1031 - this is getting too fragmented to keep the overview. Thanks!

Sorry!
My comments has been added to that issue.