Re: Oracle Style packages on postgres

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Adrian Maier <adrian(dot)maier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Date: May 10, 2005 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Oracle Style packages on postgres
To: "Jim C. Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>

On 5/9/05, Jim C. Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> wrote:
> On Sun, May 08, 2005 at 10:38:41PM -0500, Bob wrote:
> > One simple benefit to packages is just organization of related code.
>
> Which, IMHO, is greatly diminished by the lack of
> schema.package.function notation. BTW, the original post referred to
> this as user.package.function, but I believe that technically it's
> actually schema.package.function (Oracle tends to mix schemas and
> users). In any case, schema.package.function is what would make sense in
> PostgreSQL.
>
> Personally, I think the biggest win here would be adding package support
> and syntax to plpgsql. Not only would it make porting from Oracle
> easier, it would also make plpgsql much, much more powerful.

Hello,

What do you think about having some kind of language-independent
packages ?
I'm thinking that it could be handy to implement some functions in
plpgsql, some functions in plpython and so . And then bundle them
together into the same package.

Cheers,
Adrian Maier