Re: Packages: Again

On 3 February 2017 at 14:27, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> 2017-01-20 17:01 GMT+01:00 Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>:
>>
>> On 01/17/2017 09:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> MERGE isn't UPSERT, and isn't even in competition with UPSERT as a
>>>> feature. I've written reams of text explaining why this is so in
>>>> precise detail, ...
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> This is the webinar that started this whole thread (well the original
>> thread, not this weird MERGE/UPSERT stuff):
>>
>> https://www.commandprompt.com/blog/postgresql_for_oracle_people/
>>
>> Thank you to everyone that responded. You will see in this Webinar that at
>> least from the Oracle people perspective, PostgreSQL is not an option unless
>> it has packages.
>>
>> The other item that people bring up a few times is Oracle Forms but as
>> that is actually external (although dependent) on Oracle, I don't see that
>> as our responsibility.
>
>
> DB2 propose using schemas instead packages
>
> https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/data/library/techarticle/dm-0711zubiri/
>
> Now I am working with Oracle application - and I try to understand to Oracle
> developers - often pattern is using "Oracle schema" as database - and then
> the packages has sense. But there is not a mapping "Oracle schema" =
> "PostgreSQL schema" - and packages is a redundant concept in Postgres (and
> in all db, where the schema are like namaspace - MSSQL, DB2, MySQL).

It sounds like we could benefit from a documentation section
"packages" that describes how to get package-like behaviour (minus the
pre-compiled updates) from Pg using schemas and, once added, secure
variables.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services