I am creating a new site and will base it on ASP.NET MVC 5 & Dapper Contrib. I want to go all in with all these technologies - and get all the time saving / convention over configuration / terse code advantages available.I am designing the database in SQL Server 2014. Historically I have always named primary keys TableId rather than Id.CREATE TABLE User (    UserId int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,    Username VARCHAR(50),    FirstName VARCHAR(50),    LastName VARCHAR(50))Rather than...CREATE TABLE User (    Id int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,    Username VARCHAR(50),    FirstName VARCHAR(50),    LastName VARCHAR(50))This avoids ambiguity in some SQL - and avoids joining primary key fields to foreign keys with a different name. Good for clarity.However - and I think Ruby on Rails Active Record started this - ORMs such as Dapper Contrib require less configuration if the Id of a table / model is called Id. To me this is an indication of best practice and is to be encouraged.This is Dapper Contrib having an opinion and recommending a best practice.Having said that very few example sites or code I have found (beyond dapper documentation) - using Dapper or not - use Id - most use TableID.Are there advantages beyond not having to add the [Key] attribute to the TableID property of a model to get it to map - and what is best practice when doing green field development?Yes this question has been asked many times - but not with direct relation to ORMs - and not specifically about ASP.NET MVC 5 & Dapper Contrib. These are new(ish) factors.Or am I just flogging a dead horse here - is it purely personal preference and not that important - even when ORMs are taken into account?
Using Id as Primary Key in green field Dapper Contrib MVC 5 site
mvc;asp.net mvc;orm