Re: proposal for PL packages for 8.3.

From: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)hotmail(dot)com>
To: jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Cc: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, dev(at)archonet(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: proposal for PL packages for 8.3.
Date: 2006-08-08 04:56:27
Message-ID: BAY20-F111C8C9753CB4A6ECC31C0F9540@phx.gbl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> >
> > What is problem? I can attach table or sequence. What can be problem is
> > visibility of nesteded objects (if can be different than functions). My
> > proposal is only concept, and I my first goal is find way for secure
> > storing session's variables and shared native functions, like my sample.
>I
> > didn't think about others objecst and it's maybe error. Or maybe I was
> > wrong in "package is similar to schema". I wonted say so relation
>between
> > function and package is very similar to relation between functions and
> > schema.
>
>Having the relationship be similar is fine... actually implimenting
>packages as some special kind of schema sounds like a really bad idea.
>IMHO, packages should themselves be first-level objects that reside
>under schemas. Of course that raises some interesting questions about
>the visibility of the functions inside a package, which is why IIRC the
>last time this was brought up one of the ideas was to extend schemas so
>that they could contain other schemas.

I unlike concept of nested schemats or packages nested in schema. I don't
see reason for it. About implementation.. package is more special kind of
function for me. But relation between package and function I can create via
dot notation in function's name. It's different from nested syntax from
PL/SQL or ADA. I can easy separate SQL part and non SQL part.

Regards
Pavel Stehule

_________________________________________________________________
Najdete si svou lasku a nove pratele na Match.com. http://www.msn.cz/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2006-08-08 05:04:02 Re: 8.2 features status
Previous Message ITAGAKI Takahiro 2006-08-08 03:16:53 Re: CSStorm occurred again by postgreSQL8.2